A Corpus-based Study of Transfers in English Nominal Groups

Qingshun He

doi:10.1515/glot-2019-0003

Article

A Corpus-based Study of Transfers in English Nominal Groups

Qingshun He

Published/Copyright: February 18, 2020

Published by

Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Author Information Explore this Subject

From the journal Glottotheory Volume 10 Issue 1-2

Abstract

This article investigates the possibility to form determiner complexes in English nominal groups and the potential of leftward transfer of functional elements in nominal groups. The research finds that it is not possible to form hypotactic determiner complexes; rather there are hypotactic numeral complexes, hypotactic Epithet adjective complexes, hypotactic Classifier noun complexes and hypotactic Thing noun complexes, and the words for all the slots have the potential to form paratactic complexes. The corpus-based research confirms the potential of leftward transfer in nominal groups. Thereby, four types of shifts were identified: the shift from the Thing noun to the Classifier noun or adjective is a process of metaphorization from the group rank to the word rank; (2) the shift from the Classifier adjective to the Epithet₂ adjective is a process of subjectification from the distinctive to the nondistinctive features of the Thing noun within the domain of ideational metafunction; (3) the shift from the Epithet₂ adjective to the Epithet₁ adjective is a process of subjectification from the domain of ideational metafunction to that of interpersonal metafunction; (4) the shift from the Epithet₁ adjective to the post-Deictic adjective is a process of grammaticalization from the open-set attitude adjectives to the closed-set attitude adjectives.

Keywords: corpus-based; functional element; leftward transfer; nominal group; word complex

Funding statement: This research is supported by China National Social Science Fund (17BYY185).

References

Aarts, B. 2004. Modelling linguistic gradience. Studies in Language 28(1). 1–49.10.1075/sl.28.1.02aarSearch in Google Scholar

Aarts, B. 2007. In defence of distributional analysis, pace Croft. Studies in Language 31(2). 431–443.10.1075/sl.31.2.06aarSearch in Google Scholar

Adamson, S. 2000. A lovely little example: word order options and category shift in the premodifying string. In O. Fischer, A. Rosenbach & D. Stein (eds.), Pathways of change: Grammaticalization in English, 39–66. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.53.04adaSearch in Google Scholar

Andersen, H. 2001. Actualization and the (uni)directionality. In H. Andersen (ed.), Actualization: Linguistic change in progress [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 219], 225–248. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.219.11andSearch in Google Scholar

Benveniste, E. 1971. Subjectivity in language. In M. E. Meek (ed.), Problems in general linguistics, 223–230. Coral Gables, FL: University of Miami Press.Search in Google Scholar

Breban, T. 2002. Adjectives of comparison: Postdeterminer, epithet and classifier uses. MA dissertation, University of Leuven.Search in Google Scholar

Breban, T. 2010. Is there a postdeterminer in the English noun phrase? Transactions of the Philological Society 108(3). 248–264.10.1111/j.1467-968X.2010.01243.xSearch in Google Scholar

Crystal, D. 1967. English. Lingua 17(1). 24–56.10.1016/0024-3841(66)90003-9Search in Google Scholar

Davidse, K., T. Breban & A. Vanlinden. 2008. The development of secondary deictic meanings by adjectives in the English NP. English Language and Linguistics 12(3). 475–503.10.1017/S1360674308002724Search in Google Scholar

Davies, M. 2014. Making Google Books n-grams useful for a wide range of research on language change. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 19(3). 401–416.10.1075/ijcl.19.3.04davSearch in Google Scholar

Denison, D. 2006. Category change and gradience in the determiner system. In A. van Kemenade & B. Los (eds.), The handbook of the history of English, 279–304. Oxford: Blackwell.10.1002/9780470757048.ch12Search in Google Scholar

Dixon, R. 1982. Where have all the adjectives gone? Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110822939Search in Google Scholar

Finegan, E. 1995. Subjectivity and subjectivisation: An introduction. In D. Stein & S. Wright (eds.), Subjectivity and subjectivisation, 1–15. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511554469.001Search in Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 1977. Text as semantic choice in social context. In T. A. van Dyck & J. Petofi (eds.), Grammars and Descriptions, 176–225. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110839609-009Search in Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 1978. Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. London: Edward Arnold.Search in Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 1985. An introduction to functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold.Search in Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 1994. An introduction to functional grammar (2nd edition). London: Edward Arnold.Search in Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. 1999. Construing experience through meaning: A language-based approach to cognition. London/New York: Cassell.Search in Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. & C. M. I. M. Matthiessen. 2004. An introduction to functional grammar (3rd edition). London: Edward Arnold.Search in Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. & C. M. I. M. Matthiessen. 2014. An introduction to functional grammar (4th edition). London/New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203783771Search in Google Scholar

He, Q. 2013. Rank-shift directions and representations of grammatical metaphor. Journal of China University of Mining & Technology (Social Science) 15(1). 132–136.Search in Google Scholar

He, Q. & B. Yang. 2014. A study of transfer directions in grammatical metaphor. Australian Journal of Linguistics 34(3). 345–360.10.1080/07268602.2014.898226Search in Google Scholar

He, Q. & B. Yang. 2018. A corpus-based study of the correlation between text technicality and ideational metaphor in English. Lingua 203. 51–65.10.1016/j.lingua.2017.10.005Search in Google Scholar

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

Long, R. B. 1961. The sentence and its parts. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Lyons, J. 1977. Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Lyons, J. 1982. Deixis and subjectivity: Loquor, ergo sum? In R. J. Jarvella, & W. Klein (eds.), Speech, place, and action: Studies in deixis and related topics, 101–124. Chichester/New York: John Wiley.Search in Google Scholar

Martin, J. R., & P. R. White. 2005. The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. London/New York: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230511910Search in Google Scholar

Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., & M. A. K Haliday. 1997. Systemic functional grammar^: A first step into the theory. Sydney^: Macquarie University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Quirk, R., S. Greenbaum, G. Leech & J. Svartvik. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London/New York: Longman.Search in Google Scholar

Swan, T. 1988. Sentence adverbials in English: A synchronic and diachronic investigation. Oslo: Novus.Search in Google Scholar

Tabor, W., & E. C. Traugott. 1998. Structural scope expansion and grammaticalization. In A. G. Ramat & P. J. Hopper (eds.), The limits of grammaticalization, 229–272. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.37.11tabSearch in Google Scholar

Traugott, E. C. 1982. From propositional to textual and expressive meanings: Some semantic-pragmatic aspects of grammaticalization. In W. P. Lehmann & Y. Malkiel (eds.), Perspectives on historical linguistics, 245–271. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.24.09cloSearch in Google Scholar

Traugott, E. C. 1995. Subjectification in grammaticalization. In D. Stein & S. Wright (eds.), Subjectivity and subjectivisation: Linguistic perspectives, 31–54. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511554469.003Search in Google Scholar

Tucker, G. H. 1998. The lexicogrammar of adjectives: A systemic functional approach to lexis. London: Cassell.Search in Google Scholar

Van de Velde, F. 2009. Do we need the category of postdeterminer in the np? Transactions of the philological society 107(3). 293–321.10.1111/j.1467-968X.2009.01224.xSearch in Google Scholar

Van de Velde, F. 2011. Left-peripheral expansion of the English NP. English Language and Linguistics 15(2). 387–415.10.1017/S1360674311000086Search in Google Scholar

Whorf, B. L. 1956. Grammatical categories. In J. B. Carroll (ed.), Language, thought and reality: Selected writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf, 87–101. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Wulff, S. 2003. A multifactorial corpus analysis of adjective order in English. International Journal of corpus Linguistics 8(2). 245–282.10.1075/ijcl.8.2.04wulSearch in Google Scholar

Wulff, S. & S. Th. Gries. 2015. Prenominal adjective order preferences in Chinese and German L2 English. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 5(1). 122–150.10.1075/lab.5.1.05wulSearch in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2020-02-18

Published in Print: 2020-02-25

You are currently not able to access this content.

Articles in the same Issue

https://doi.org/10.1515/glot-2019-0003

Keywords for this article

corpus-based; functional element; leftward transfer; nominal group; word complex