Home As if grammar, discourse and prosody don’t interact: a comparative study of hypothetical manner clauses in English and Dutch
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

As if grammar, discourse and prosody don’t interact: a comparative study of hypothetical manner clauses in English and Dutch

  • Wout Van Praet EMAIL logo , Liesbeth Degand and An Van linden
Published/Copyright: February 19, 2025
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

This study examines hypothetical manner (HM) clauses in spoken English and Dutch. In both languages, HM clauses can assume different levels of grammatical and discursive (in)dependence, and different semantic-pragmatic functions. This study examines whether the grammatical-discursive configurations that English and Dutch allow for are associated with different prosodic profiles. To this end, the study investigates not just prosodic integration of the clause in the same intonation unit as the main/previous clause, but also potential pitch resets (or downsteps) at the start of the clause, average amount of pausing before the clause, and the pitch contour with which the clause is uttered. The study finds that, while syntactic status and semantic-pragmatic function interact, syntactic status is generally the better predictor of the prosodic realisation of the clause. Among syntactically independent clauses, few differences are found between discursively independent clauses (‘stand-alone insubordinates’) and discursively dependent ones (‘dependency shifts’). We argue, therefore, that these two clause types are similar from a communicative viewpoint, both marking ‘fresh starts’ in the discourse. Finally, the many observed similarities between English and Dutch indicate that meaningful generalisations can be made about the interactions between grammatical, discursive and prosodic profiles, at least for the two languages under investigation.


Corresponding author: Wout Van Praet, UCLouvain, Ottignies-Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium, E-mail:

Acknowledgments

The research reported on in this article was made possible by the research grant ‘How do grammar and discourse interact? Answers from subordination, coordination and insubordination’ (PDR T.0065.20) (promoters: Liesbeth Degand and An Van linden), awarded by the F.R.S.-FNRS. We sincerely thank the two anonymous referees for their very substantial reports, making many helpful suggestions to improve this study.

  1. Data repository: The dataset underlying this article can be found on the ULiège Dataverse, the institutional FAIR data repository of the University of Liège: https://doi.org/10.58119/ULG/3VC5EX.

References

Beckman, Mary, Julia Hirschberg & Stefanie Shattuck-Hufnagel. 2005. The original ToBI system and the evolution of the ToBI framework. In Sun-Ah Jun (ed.), Prosodic models and transcription: Towards prosodic typology, 9–54. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199249633.003.0002Search in Google Scholar

Bledin, Justin & Sadhwi Srinivas. 2020. Exclamatory as ifs. Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 24(1). 84–101.Search in Google Scholar

Bledin, Justin & Sadhwi Srinivas. 2023. Descriptive as ifs. Linguistics and Philosophy 46. 87–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-022-09352-3.Search in Google Scholar

Brinton, Laurel. 2014. The extremes of insubordination: Exclamatory as if. Journal of English Linguistics 42(2). 93–113. https://doi.org/10.1177/0075424214521425.Search in Google Scholar

Collins, Beverley & Inger Mees. 2003. The phonetics of English and Dutch. London: Brill.10.1163/9789047402503_004Search in Google Scholar

Dancygier, Barbara & Eve Sweetser. 2005. Mental spaces in grammar: Conditional constructions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486760Search in Google Scholar

Debaisieux, Jeanne-Marie. 2016. Toward a global approach to discourse uses of conjunctions in spoken French. Language Sciences 58. 79–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2016.04.001.Search in Google Scholar

D’Hertefelt, Sarah. 2018. Insubordination in Germanic: A typology of complement and conditional constructions. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110548686Search in Google Scholar

D’Hertefelt, Sarah & Jean-Christophe Verstraete. 2014. Independent complement constructions in Swedish and Danish: Insubordination or dependency shift? Journal of Pragmatics 60. 89–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.11.002.Search in Google Scholar

Elvira-García, Wendy, Paolo Roseano & Ana María Fernández Planas. 2017. Prosody as a cue for syntactic dependency: Evidence from dependent and independent clauses with subordination marks in Spanish. Journal of Pragmatics 109. 29–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.12.002.Search in Google Scholar

Evans, Nicholas. 2007. Insubordination and its uses. In Irina Nicolaeva (ed.), Finiteness: Theoretical and empirical foundations, 366–431. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780199213733.003.0011Search in Google Scholar

Foley, William & Robert Van Valin. 1984. Functional syntax and universal grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Ford, Cecilia E., Barbara A. Fox & Sandra A. Thompson. 2002. Constituency and the grammar of turn increments. In Cecilia E. Ford, Barbara A. Fox & Sandra A. Thompson (eds.), The language of turn and sequence, 14–38. New York: Oxford Academic.10.1093/oso/9780195124897.003.0002Search in Google Scholar

Fowler, HenryW. 1965. A dictionary of modern English usage. Oxford: Clarendon.Search in Google Scholar

Gras, Pedro. 2016. Revisiting the functional typology of insubordination: Que-initial sentences in Spanish. In Nicholas Evans & Honoré Watanabe (eds.), Insubordination, 113–144. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.115.05graSearch in Google Scholar

Gras, Pedro & Wendy Elvira-García. 2021. The role of intonation in Construction Grammar: On prosodic constructions. Journal of Pragmatics 180. 232–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.05.010.Search in Google Scholar

Gras, Pedro & María Sol Sansiñena. 2017. Exclamatives in the functional typology of insubordination: Evidence form complement insubordinate constructions in Spanish. Journal of Pragmatics 115. 21–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.04.005.Search in Google Scholar

Günthner, Susanne. 1999. Entwickelt sich der Konzessivkonnektor obwohl zum Diskursmaker? Grammatikalisierungstendenzen im gesprochenen Deutsch. Linguistische Berichte 180. 409–444.Search in Google Scholar

Gussenhoven, Carlos. 2005. The transcription of Dutch intonation. In Sun-Ah Jun (ed.), Prosodic models and transcription: Towards prosodic typology, 118–145. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199249633.003.0005Search in Google Scholar

Haeseryn, Walter, Kirsten Romijn, Guido Geerts, Jaap de Rooij & Maarten van den Toorn (eds.). 1997. Algemene Nederlandse spraakkunst. Groningen & Leuven: Wolters-Noordhoff.Search in Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 1967. Intonation and grammar in British English. The Hague: Mouton.10.1515/9783111357447Search in Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. & Christian Matthiessen. 2004. Introduction to functional grammar. London: Hodder Arnold.Search in Google Scholar

Hopper, Paul & Elizabeth Closs Traugott. 1993. Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Hothorn, Torsten, Kurt Hornik Kurt & Achim Zeileis. 2006. Unbiased recursive partitioning: A conditional inference framework. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics 15(3). 651–674. https://doi.org/10.1198/106186006x133933.Search in Google Scholar

Kaltenböck, Gunther. 2016. On the grammatical status of insubordinate if-clauses. In Gunther Kaltenböck, Evelien Keizer & Arne Lohmann (eds.), Outside the clause: Form and function of extra-clausal constituents, 341–377. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.178.12kalSearch in Google Scholar

Liberman, Mark & Ivan Sag. 1974. Prosodic form and discourse function. Papers from the tenth regional meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society, 416–427. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Search in Google Scholar

Looij, Matthijs & Diana Minnaert. 2019. Alsof ik nazi ben!: Emotie en ontkenning in de Nederlandse alsof-X-constructie. Nederlandse Taalkunde 23(3). 359–369. https://doi.org/10.5117/nedtaa2018.3.005.looi.Search in Google Scholar

López-Couso, María José & Belén Méndez-Naya. 2012a. On the use of as if, as though, and like in Present-Day English complementation structures. Journal of English Linguistics 40(2). 172–195. https://doi.org/10.1177/0075424211418976.Search in Google Scholar

López-Couso, María José & Belén Méndez-Naya. 2012b. On comparative complementizers in English: Evidence from historical corpora. In Nila Vázquez-González (ed.), Creation and use of English corpora in Spain, 309–333. Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.Search in Google Scholar

Mithun, Marianne. 2008. The extension of dependency beyond the sentence. Language 84(1). 69–119. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2008.0054.Search in Google Scholar

O’Grady, Gerard. 2017. Theme and prosody: Redundancy or meaning making? English Text Construction 10(2). 274–297. https://doi.org/10.1075/etc.10.2.05ogr.Search in Google Scholar

Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Search in Google Scholar

Rietveld, Toni & Carlos Gussenhoven. 1985. On the relation between pitch excursion size and prominence. Journal of Phonetics 13(3). 299–308.10.1016/S0095-4470(19)30761-2Search in Google Scholar

Sansiñena, María Sol. 2019. Patterns of (in)dependence. In Karin Beijering, Gunther Kaltenböck & María Sol Sansiñena (eds.), Insubordination: Theoretical and empirical issues, 199–239. Berlin & Boston: Walter de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110638288-007Search in Google Scholar

Schwenter, Scott. 1996. The pragmatics of independent si-clauses in Spanish. Hispanic Linguistics 8. 316–351.Search in Google Scholar

Schwenter, Scott. 2016. Independent si-clauses in Spanish: Functions and consequences for insubordination. In Nicholas Evans & Honoré Watanabe (eds.), Insubordination, 89–112. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.115.04schSearch in Google Scholar

Silverman, Kim, Mary Beckman, John Pitrelli, Mari Ostendorf, Colin Wightman, Patti Price, Janet Pierrehumbert & Julia Hirschberg. 1992. TOBI: A standard for labeling English prosody. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (ICSLP 92), 867–870.10.21437/ICSLP.1992-260Search in Google Scholar

Sluijter, Agaath M. C. & Jacques M. B. Terken. 1993. Beyond sentence prosody: Paragraph intonation in Dutch. Phonetica 50(3). 180–188.10.1159/000261938Search in Google Scholar

Smessaert, Hans, Bert Cornillie, Dagmar Divjak & Karel van den Eynde. 2005. Degrees of clause integration: From endotactic to exotactic subordination in Dutch. Linguistics 43(3). 471–529. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2005.43.3.471.Search in Google Scholar

’t Hart, Johan. 1981. Differential sensitivity to pitch distance, particularly in speech. Journal of the Acoustic Society of America 69(3). 811–821.10.1121/1.385592Search in Google Scholar

Tench, Paul. 2011. Transcribing the sound of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511698361Search in Google Scholar

Veilleux, Nanette, Stefanie Shattuck-Hufnagel & Alejna Brugos. 2006. 6.911 Transcribing prosodic structure of spoken utterances with ToBI. MIT OpenCourseWare. Available at: https://ocw.mit.edu.Search in Google Scholar

Verstraete, Jean-Christophe. 2007. Rethinking the coordinate-subordinate dichotomy: Interpersonal grammar and the analysis of adverbial clauses in English. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110918199Search in Google Scholar

Wichmann, Anne. 2000. Intonation in text and discourse: Beginnings, middles and ends. Harlow: Longman.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2024-02-23
Accepted: 2024-09-13
Published Online: 2025-02-19
Published in Print: 2025-11-25

© 2024 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Articles
  3. Detecting angloversal tendencies in the outer circle: a pilot study on a Maltese English speaker
  4. On the construal of MUSIC IS MOTION metaphor
  5. Multifunctionality matters: preverbal yǒu in Mandarin and its aspectual potential
  6. Voice, impersonal construction, and zero lexeme: formalization of crucial notions
  7. Comparison of micro- and macro- structural narrative features between Turkish-Kurdish bilinguals and Turkish monolinguals
  8. Quantifier float in Hmong
  9. Non-canonical quantification in Old Persian: the adverb vasai̯
  10. Intransitive clause word order in Neo-Aramaic: information structure, pragmatics and word order shifts
  11. How grammatical constructions contribute to responsibility attribution in GBV coverage: a corpus-assisted study
  12. Middle voice in Cháoyáng Mǐn
  13. Constructing a web-accessible lexical database for core Tongan vocabulary
  14. Beyond hypothetical manner: a functional typology of insubordinate como si-clauses
  15. Numeral systems in Lezgic languages
  16. Revisiting Hittite prayer lexicon: a focus on heteroclitic nouns and light verb constructions
  17. Presupposition: accepted information or embraced beliefs? The role of informative function and trigger type in separating two levels of accommodation
  18. Laryngealized vowels in Yánesha’: a phonetic description and subsegmental analysis
  19. As if grammar, discourse and prosody don’t interact: a comparative study of hypothetical manner clauses in English and Dutch
  20. A corpus-based behavioral profile analysis of polysemy and antonymy: the case of the ancient Greek size adjectives mikrós and mégas
  21. Book Reviews
  22. Ryan Nefdt: Language, Science, and Structure
  23. Christian M.I.M. Matthiessen & Kazuhiro Teruya: Systemic Functional Linguistics: A Complete Guide
Downloaded on 21.11.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/flin-2024-2058/html?lang=en
Scroll to top button