Chapter 7. That -complementiser omission in N + be + that -clauses
-
Annette Mantlik
Abstract
The omission of the complementiser that after lexical verbs, as in I think she went home or I guess she did not enjoy herself, has been studied intensively from a diachronic and synchronic perspective. In contrast, that-complementiser omission in other contexts (e.g. the truth is she never wanted to come anyway or the problem is she does not like these people) has not received much attention. We report the results of a multi-level corpus-based study investigating the diachronic development of the omission of that in the N + BE + that construction. The study is framed in the light of two competing hypotheses suggested by research on that-omission in verb complementation: the assumption that the omission is mainly a matter of stylistic choice and the assumption that it represents a case of diachronic change that can be described as constructional change or even constructionalisation. In order to test these hypotheses, we carry out a quantitative and qualitative analysis of a large dataset extracted from the Corpus of Historical American English. The results suggest that both factors are involved but shift in importance over time. While stylistic choice may have been the original motivation for the omission of that, the later development shows evidence for constructional change and signs indicating the beginning of further changes that could eventually lead to the emergence of a new construction by means of constructional split.
Abstract
The omission of the complementiser that after lexical verbs, as in I think she went home or I guess she did not enjoy herself, has been studied intensively from a diachronic and synchronic perspective. In contrast, that-complementiser omission in other contexts (e.g. the truth is she never wanted to come anyway or the problem is she does not like these people) has not received much attention. We report the results of a multi-level corpus-based study investigating the diachronic development of the omission of that in the N + BE + that construction. The study is framed in the light of two competing hypotheses suggested by research on that-omission in verb complementation: the assumption that the omission is mainly a matter of stylistic choice and the assumption that it represents a case of diachronic change that can be described as constructional change or even constructionalisation. In order to test these hypotheses, we carry out a quantitative and qualitative analysis of a large dataset extracted from the Corpus of Historical American English. The results suggest that both factors are involved but shift in importance over time. While stylistic choice may have been the original motivation for the omission of that, the later development shows evidence for constructional change and signs indicating the beginning of further changes that could eventually lead to the emergence of a new construction by means of constructional split.
Chapters in this book
- Prelim pages i
- Table of contents v
- Chapter 1. Introduction to the noun phrase in English 1
- Chapter 2. Complex NPs with third-order entity clauses 11
- Chapter 3. Adjective stacking in Early Modern English 47
- Chapter 4. The rich, the poor, the obvious 77
- Chapter 5. Variable article usage with institutional nouns 113
- Chapter 6. Anaphoric reference in Early Modern English 143
- Chapter 7. That -complementiser omission in N + be + that -clauses 187
- Index of terms 223
- Index of names 227
Chapters in this book
- Prelim pages i
- Table of contents v
- Chapter 1. Introduction to the noun phrase in English 1
- Chapter 2. Complex NPs with third-order entity clauses 11
- Chapter 3. Adjective stacking in Early Modern English 47
- Chapter 4. The rich, the poor, the obvious 77
- Chapter 5. Variable article usage with institutional nouns 113
- Chapter 6. Anaphoric reference in Early Modern English 143
- Chapter 7. That -complementiser omission in N + be + that -clauses 187
- Index of terms 223
- Index of names 227
