Home The blurring of the boundaries: changes in verb/noun heterosemy in Recent English
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

The blurring of the boundaries: changes in verb/noun heterosemy in Recent English

  • Bin Shao , Jing Zheng and Hendrik De Smet ORCID logo EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: June 12, 2023

Abstract

Conversion is a common feature of present-day English, leading to many ‘heterosemous’ words that express related meanings across multiple word classes. Especially common is verb/noun heterosemy, as in flow or hand, both of which can be used as verbs or as nouns. The prevalence of verb/noun heterosemy sets English apart from closely related Germanic languages and is one respect in which English behaves as a language with high boundary permeability. This paper investigates how verb/noun heterosemy has been evolving in Recent English (1920s–2010s). Using quantitative analysis within a large sample of 877 heterosemous words, it is shown that associations between specific words and word classes have been weakening over the last century. More precisely, within our sample, heterosemous words on average tend to develop towards more balanced heterosemy, whereby their association to either one word class or another becomes less pronounced. The findings suggest that English is in the process of a long-term drift towards greater boundary permeability. As high boundary permeability has been associated with low reliance on inflectional morphology in a language, this could be a long-term consequence of the overall loss of inflections earlier in the history of the language.


Corresponding author: Hendrik De Smet, Department of Linguistics, KU Leuven, Blijde Inkomststraat 21, Box 3308, Leuven 3000, Belgium, E-mail:

Funding source: National Social Science Fund of China

Award Identifier / Grant number: 20AYY001

  1. Research funding: This work was supported by National Social Science Fund of China (No. 20AYY001).

Appendix

The following 1,000 words had been automatically retrieved from COHA. Crossed out words have been deleted from our sample following a manual check. The sample for our quantitative analysis contained all remaining 877 words.

abuse , access, accord, account, ache, act, addict, address , advance, advocate , aid, aim, alarm, alert, ally , amount, anchor, anger, angle, answer, appeal, approach, arc, arch, array, arrest, assault, associate , attack, attempt, attribute , auction, average, award, back , backup , balance, balloon, ban, bang, bar, bargain, bark, bartender , base, bat , bath , battle, bead, beam, bear , beat, bend, benefit, bet, bias, bid, bite, black , blame, blast, blaze, blend, blink, block, blossom, blow, bluff, blush, board, boast, boil, bolt, bomb, bond, boom, boost, boot, border, bore, bounce, bow , bowl, brace, brake, brand, break, breakfast, breed, broadcast, brush, bubble, buck , bud, bug, bulk, bump, bunch, bundle, burden, burn, burst, bust , butt , button, cable, call, calm, campaign, can , cap, capture, care, carpet, cart, cash, cast, cause, caution, cement, chain, challenge, champion, change, channel, chant, charge, charm, chart, charter, chase, chat, cheat, check, cheer, chick , chill, chip, choke, chop, chronicle, chuckle, circle, claim, clamp, clap, clasp, claw, click, climax, clip, clown, cluster, clutch, coach, coat, coil, coin, collapse, color, comb, combat, comfort, command, comment, commission, compliment, compound , compromise, con , concern, conduct , confine, consent, construct , contact, content , contest , contract , contrast , control, convert , convict , cook, cool , copy, cost, cough, counsel, count, countenance, counter, couple, cover, crack, craft, crash, credit, creep, crop, cross, crouch, crowd, crown, cruise, crunch, crush, cry, cup, curb, cure, curl, curse, curve, cut, cycle, dam, damage, dance, dart, dash, date, deal, debate, debut, decline, decrease, decree, defeat, defect, delay, delegate , delight, demand, deposit, desert , design, desire, despair, dial, dictate, didn , dig, dip, discharge , discipline, discount , disgust, dislike, dispatch , display, dispute, distress, ditch, dive, divide, divorce, dock, document, don , dope, dot, double, doubt, down , draft, drain, drape, dream, dress, drift, drill, drink, drip, drive, drone, drop, drum, duck , dump, dust, dye, ease, echo, effect, embrace, encounter, end, endeavor, engineer, envy, escape, escort , essay , estimate , exchange, excuse, exercise, exhaust, exhibit, exile, exit, experience, experiment, exploit, export , express , extract , face, fall, fan , fancy, fare, fashion, fatigue, favor, fear, feast, feature, feed, fer , fight, figure, file, filter, finance, finish, fire, fish, fit, fix, flag, flame, flank, flash, flavor, flick, fling, flip, float, flock, flood, flow, flush, flutter, fly, focus, fold, fool, force, form, founder , frame, freak, freeze, frown, fuck, fuel, function, fund, gain, gasp, gaze, gear, gesture, giggle, glance, glare, gleam, glimpse, glow, gossip, grace, grade, graduate , grant, grasp, grill, grin, grind, grip, groan, growl, grunt, guarantee, guard, guide, gut, hack, hail, halt, hammer, handicap, handle, harbor, harm, harvest, hate, haul, haunt, hawk, hazard, head, headline, heap, heat, heave, hedge, help, herd, hide , highlight, hike, hint, hiss, hit, hog , hollow, honor, hook, hop , hope, host, hound, hug, hum, hunt, hurry, implement, import , increase , influence, ing , insert, institute, insult , interview, iron, issue, jack , jail, jam, jar , jerk, jockey, joke, journey, judge, jump, kick, kid, kiss, knock, knot, label, labor, lace, lack, lance, land, lap , laugh, launch, lead , leak, leap, lease, lecture, level, license, lick, lie , lift, light, limit, line, link, list, live, load, lobby, lock, lodge, log, look, loom, loop, lounge, love, lumber, lump, lure, mail, major , maneuver, manufacture, map, march , mark , market, marshal, mask, master, match, mate, matter, measure, menace, mention, merchandise, merit, mess, mill, mind, mine , miss , mist, mistake, mix, moan, model, monitor, moonlight, motion, motor, mount, move, murder, murmur, muse, nail, name, nap, need, neglect, nest, net, nigger , nod, note, notice, nurse, object , offer, orbit, order, outfit, outlaw, outline, ow , pace, pack, package, pad, paint, pair, pan , panic, pant , parade, pardon, park, pass, pat , patch, patrol, pause, pay, peak, peek, peel, peer , pen, permit , pet, petition, phase, phone, photograph, picture, pile, pilot, pin, pioneer, pipe, piss, pit, pitch , pity, place, plan, plant, play, pledge, plot, plunge, point, poison, poke, polish , poll, pop , pose, position, post , pound , powder, practice, praise, prejudice, prep, present , preserve, press, prey, pride, print, proceed, process, profile, profit, program, progress , project , promise, prop , protest , pulse, pump, punch, purchase, purse, puzzle, quarrel, question, quiver, quote, race , rack, rage, raid, rain, rally, ram, range, rank, rape, rate, ration, rattle, rear , rebel , recess, record , recruit, reference, reform , regard, register, regret, rein, release, remark, remedy, rent, repair, repeal, reply, report, request, rescue, reserve, resolve, resort, respect, rest , result, resume , retort, retreat, return, reverse, review, revolt, reward, ride, rim, ring , riot, rip , rise, risk, rival, roar, rock , roll, root, round, row, ruin, rule, rumor, run, rush, sack, sacrifice, saddle, sag, sail, salute, sample, sanction, scale , scan, scar, scare, scent, schedule, scoop, score, scorn, scout, scrap, scrape, scratch, scream, screen, screw, scrub, seal , search, seat, seed, sense, sentence, set , shade, shame, shape, share, shave, shed , shell, shelter, shield, shift, shine, ship, shiver, shock, shop, shore , shout, shovel, show, shower, shriek, shrink, shrug, shudder, shuttle, sigh, sign, signal, silence, sin, sink, sip, skate, sketch, ski, skip , skirt, slam, slap, slash, sleep, slice, slide, slip, slope, slot, slump, smash, smell, smile, smoke, snack, snake, snatch, sniff, snort, sob, sock , sort, sound, span, spark, spear, speed, spell , spice, spike, spill, spin, spit, splash, split, spoil, sponsor, spoon, spot, spray, spread, spring, spy, square, squat, squeeze, stab, stack, stage, stagger, stain, stake , stall, stamp, start, state, steam, steer, stem, step, stick, stink, stir, stitch, stock, stoop, store, storm, strain, strand , strap, streak, stream, stress, stretch, stride, strike, string, strip, stroke, stroll, struggle, stud , study, stuff, stump, subject , substitute, suit, sum, supply, support, surge, surprise, surrender, survey , suspect , swallow , swamp, swarm, sway, sweat, sweep, swell, swim, swing, swirl, switch, tackle, tag, talk, tap , tape, target, taste, tattoo, tear , telegraph, telephone, temper, term, test, think , thread, thrill, throng, thrust, thumb, thunder, tie, tile, tilt, tip , title, toast, toll , top, torch, torpedo, torture, total, touch, tour, tower, toy, trace, track, trade, trail, train, transfer , transport , trap, trash, travel, tread, treasure, treat, trick, trigger, trim, trip, triumph, trot, trouble, trumpet, trust, tuck , tug, tumble, tune, turn, twist, update , urge, use, vacuum, value, vault, ve , veil, venture, veto, view, visit, volunteer, vote, wage, wail, wake , walk, warp, warrant, wash, waste, watch, wave, weave, weed, welcome, well , wet , wheel, whip, whirl, whisper, whistle, will, win, wind , wink, wire, wish, witness, wonder, work, worm, worry, worship, wound, wrap, wreck, yank, yawn, yell, yield, zip .

References

Aarts, Bas. 2007. Syntactic gradience: The nature of grammatical indeterminacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780199219261.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Aghabozorgi, Saeed, Ali Seyed Shirkhorshidi & The Ying Wah. 2015. Time-series clustering–a decade review. Information Systems 53. 16–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.is.2015.04.007.Search in Google Scholar

Arad, Maya. 2005. Roots and patterns: Hebrew morpho-syntax. Berlin: Springer.Search in Google Scholar

Balteiro, Isabel. 2007a. A contribution to the study of conversion in English. Münster: Waxmann.Search in Google Scholar

Balteiro, Isabel. 2007b. The directionality of conversion in English. A dia-synchronic study. Bern and New York: Peter Lang.Search in Google Scholar

Bauer, Laurie. 1983. English word-formation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139165846Search in Google Scholar

Berg, Thomas. 2014. Boundary permeability: A parameter for linguistic typology. Linguistic Typology 18(3). 489–531. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2014-0020.Search in Google Scholar

Biese, Yrjö Moses Jalmari. 1941. Origin and development of conversions in English. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seuran Kirjapainon.Search in Google Scholar

Cannon, Garland. 1985. Functional shift in English. Linguistics 23. 411–431. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1985.23.3.411.Search in Google Scholar

Clark, Eve V. & Herbert H. Clark. 1979. When nouns surface as verbs. Language 55. 767–811. https://doi.org/10.2307/412745.Search in Google Scholar

Davies, Ceri. 2004. A corpus-based investigation of noun to verb conversion in English. Liverpool: University of Liverpool doctoral Dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Davies, Mark. 2012. Expanding horizons in historical linguistics with the 400-million word Corpus of Historical American English. Corpora 7(2). 121–157. https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2012.0024.Search in Google Scholar

Enfield, Nick J. 2006. Heterosemy and the grammar-lexicon trade-off. In Felix K. Ameka, Alan Dench & Nicholas Evans (eds.), Catching language: The standing challenge of grammar writing, 297–320. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110197693.297Search in Google Scholar

Farrell, Patrick. 2001. Functional shift as category underspecification. English Language and Linguistics 5. 109–130. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1360674301000156.Search in Google Scholar

García Velasco, Daniel. 2009. Conversion in English and its implications for functional discourse grammar. Lingua 119(8). 1164–1185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2007.12.006.Search in Google Scholar

Goddard, Cliff. 2011. Semantic analysis: A practical introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Gesmann, Markus & Diego de Castillo. 2011. Using the Google Visualisation API with R. The R Journal 3(2). 40–44. https://doi.org/10.32614/rj-2011-017.Search in Google Scholar

Hale, Ken L. & Samuel Jay Keyser. 2002. Prolegomena to a theory of argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/5634.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Hilpert, Martin. 2011. Dynamic visualizations of language change: Motion charts on the basis of bivariate and multivariate data from diachronic corpora. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 16(4). 435–461. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.16.4.01hil.Search in Google Scholar

Huddleston, Rodney & Geoffrey K. Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781316423530Search in Google Scholar

Jespersen, Otto. 1924. The philosophy of grammar. London: George Allen & Unflin.Search in Google Scholar

Ježek, Elisabetta. 2016. The lexicon: An introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Ježek, Elisabetta & Paolo Ramat. 2009. On parts-of-speech transcategorization. Folia Linguistica 43. 391–416. https://doi.org/10.1515/flin.2009.011.Search in Google Scholar

Katamba, Francis. 1993. Morphology. London: Macmillan.10.1007/978-1-349-22851-5Search in Google Scholar

Kastovsky, Dieter. 1990. The typological status of old English word formation. In Sylvia Adamson, Vivien Law, Nigel Vincent & Susan Wright (eds.), Papers from the 5th international conference on English historical linguistics, 205–224. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.65.14kasSearch in Google Scholar

Koutsoukos, Nikos. 2021. Denominal verb formation in English and Modern Greek. Languages in Contrast 21(1). 138–161. https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.19020.kou.Search in Google Scholar

Lauwers, Peter & Kristel van Goethem. 2020. L’adjectivité face à la perméabilité catégorielle. Examen contrastif du néerlandais et du français. In Franck Neveu & Audrey Roig (eds.), L’Adjectivité, 333–355. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110604788-015Search in Google Scholar

Lichtenberk, Frantisek. 1991. Semantic change and heterosemy in grammaticalization. Language 67(3). 475–509. https://doi.org/10.2307/415035.Search in Google Scholar

Lieber, Rochelle. 1981. Morphological conversion within a restrictive theory of the lexicon. In Michael Moortgat, Harry van der Hulst & Teun Hoekstra (eds.), The scope of lexical rules, 161–200. Dordrecht: Foris.10.1515/9783112327364-006Search in Google Scholar

Lieber, Rochelle. 1992. Deconstructing morphology: Word formation in syntactic theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Lieber, Rochelle. 2004. Morphology and lexical semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Lieber, Rochelle. 2005. English word formation processes. In Pavol Štekauer & Rochelle Lieber (eds.), Handbook of word formation, 375–422. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/1-4020-3596-9_16Search in Google Scholar

Lohmann, Arne. 2017. Phonological properties of word classes and directionality in conversion. Word Structure 10(2). 204–234. https://doi.org/10.3366/word.2017.0108.Search in Google Scholar

Lohmann, Arne. 2018. Cut (n) and cut (v) are not homophones: Lemma frequency affects the duration of noun-verb conversion pairs. Journal of Linguistics 54(4). 753–777. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022226717000378.Search in Google Scholar

Marchand, Hans. 1969. The categories and types of present-day English word-formation: A synchronic-diachronic approach. Munich: Beck.Search in Google Scholar

Martsa, Sándor. 2013. Conversion in English: A cognitive semantic approach. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Search in Google Scholar

Persson, Gunnar. 1988. Homonymy, polysemy and heterosemy. The Types of lexical ambiguity in English. In Karl Hyldgaard-Jensen & Arne Zettersten (eds.), Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Lexicography, 269–280. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.10.1515/9783111347349-010Search in Google Scholar

Plag, Ingo. 2018. Word-formation in English, 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781316771402Search in Google Scholar

Rijkhoff, Jan & Eva van Lier (eds.). 2013. Flexible word classes: Typological studies of underspecified parts of speech. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199668441.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Sapir, Edward. 1921. Language. An introduction to the study of speech. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company.Search in Google Scholar

Sweet, Henry. 1891. A new English grammar. Logical and historical, Part I. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Search in Google Scholar

Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt. 2012. Analyticity and syntheticity in the history of English. In Terttu Nevalainen & Elizabeth Closs Traugott (eds.), The Oxford handbook of the history of English, 654–665. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199922765.013.0056Search in Google Scholar

Valera, Salvador & Alba E. Ruz. 2021. Conversion in English: Homonymy, polysemy and paronymy. English Language and Linguistics 25(1). 181–204. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1360674319000546.Search in Google Scholar

Van Goethem, Kristel. 2017. Lexical categories and processes of category change. Perspectives for a constructionist approach. Zeitschrift für Wortbildung/Journal of Word Formation 1(2). 31–61. https://doi.org/10.3726/zwjw.2017.02.02.Search in Google Scholar

Vogel, Petra M. 2000. Grammaticalisation and part-of-speech systems. In Petra M. Vogel & Bernard Comrie (eds.). Approaches to the typology of word classes, 259–284. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110806120.259Search in Google Scholar

Wang, Renqiang. 2014. Xiandai hanyu jianlei xianxiang yanjiu [Multiple class membership in modern English: A study based on Oxford Advanced Learner’s English Dictionary (7th edn.)]. Waiguoyu [Journal of Foreign Languages] 4. 49–59.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2022-06-21
Accepted: 2023-05-19
Published Online: 2023-06-12
Published in Print: 2024-05-27

© 2023 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 11.11.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/cllt-2022-0053/html
Scroll to top button