John Benjamins Publishing Company
Cross-varietal diversity in constructional entrenchment
-
Mitsuko Narita Izutsu
Abstract
The present study analyzes clauses with final tags as a construction, i.e., a symbolic form-meaning pairing, which is formulated as [[ANCHi FTj] ↔ [S conclude verbalization of propositioni with attitudej]] (ANCH: Anchor, FT: Final Tag, S: Speaker). The final-tag construction is observed in most varieties of English. However, a comparison of two spoken corpora of English (SPICE-Ireland and the Santa Barbara Corpus) reveals that the degree of the constructional entrenchment of this symbolic unit differs markedly between Irish and American English. Our analysis illustrates that both type and token frequencies of final tags are higher in Irish English than American English. Interpreting the results in terms of the three characteristics of grammatical constructionalization: increase in schematicity, increase in productivity, and decrease in compositionality (Traugott & Trousdale 2013), our study concludes that the final-tag construction is more entrenched in the minds of Irish English speakers than American English speakers. This observation points to a greater development of the construction in Irish English, where the final position has become a more accommodating slot of broader versatility in which the speakers can put a wider variety of expressions for emotive and/or interactive purposes. In addition to conceivable motivations (sub- and superstrate influences) responsible for the development, the constructional approach can also illustrate the impact of a well-entrenched schema on incremental language use.
Abstract
The present study analyzes clauses with final tags as a construction, i.e., a symbolic form-meaning pairing, which is formulated as [[ANCHi FTj] ↔ [S conclude verbalization of propositioni with attitudej]] (ANCH: Anchor, FT: Final Tag, S: Speaker). The final-tag construction is observed in most varieties of English. However, a comparison of two spoken corpora of English (SPICE-Ireland and the Santa Barbara Corpus) reveals that the degree of the constructional entrenchment of this symbolic unit differs markedly between Irish and American English. Our analysis illustrates that both type and token frequencies of final tags are higher in Irish English than American English. Interpreting the results in terms of the three characteristics of grammatical constructionalization: increase in schematicity, increase in productivity, and decrease in compositionality (Traugott & Trousdale 2013), our study concludes that the final-tag construction is more entrenched in the minds of Irish English speakers than American English speakers. This observation points to a greater development of the construction in Irish English, where the final position has become a more accommodating slot of broader versatility in which the speakers can put a wider variety of expressions for emotive and/or interactive purposes. In addition to conceivable motivations (sub- and superstrate influences) responsible for the development, the constructional approach can also illustrate the impact of a well-entrenched schema on incremental language use.
Chapters in this book
- Prelim pages i
- Table of contents v
- Introduction 1
-
Part 1. General issues
- Are there two different ways of approaching grammaticalization? 23
- Functional similarity despite geographical distance 55
- Analogy 75
- Central Southern Guangxi as a grammaticalization area 105
- Grammaticalizing connectives in English and discourse information structure 135
-
Part 2. Case studies
-
The noun phrase
- The grammaticalization of interrogative pronouns into relative pronouns in South-Caucasian languages 163
-
The verbal phrase
- From time to surprise 185
- C-gravitation and the grammaticalization degree of “present progressives” in English, French, and Dutch 207
- The avertive and proximative grams in Maltese using the auxiliary għodd 231
-
Discourse markers
- Pragmatic uses of nu in Old Saxon and Old English 259
- (Inter)subjectification and paradigmaticization 291
- The development of three classifiers into degree modifier constructions in Chinese 315
- From the inside to the outside of the sentence 333
- The development of the Chinese scalar additive coordinators derived from prohibitives 361
- Cross-varietal diversity in constructional entrenchment 381
- Index 431
Chapters in this book
- Prelim pages i
- Table of contents v
- Introduction 1
-
Part 1. General issues
- Are there two different ways of approaching grammaticalization? 23
- Functional similarity despite geographical distance 55
- Analogy 75
- Central Southern Guangxi as a grammaticalization area 105
- Grammaticalizing connectives in English and discourse information structure 135
-
Part 2. Case studies
-
The noun phrase
- The grammaticalization of interrogative pronouns into relative pronouns in South-Caucasian languages 163
-
The verbal phrase
- From time to surprise 185
- C-gravitation and the grammaticalization degree of “present progressives” in English, French, and Dutch 207
- The avertive and proximative grams in Maltese using the auxiliary għodd 231
-
Discourse markers
- Pragmatic uses of nu in Old Saxon and Old English 259
- (Inter)subjectification and paradigmaticization 291
- The development of three classifiers into degree modifier constructions in Chinese 315
- From the inside to the outside of the sentence 333
- The development of the Chinese scalar additive coordinators derived from prohibitives 361
- Cross-varietal diversity in constructional entrenchment 381
- Index 431
