In:Grammaticalization meets Construction Grammar
Edited by Evie Coussé, Peter Andersson and Joel Olofsson
[Constructional Approaches to Language 21] 2018
► pp. 169–202
Type frequency, productivity and schematicity in the evolution of the Latin secundum NP construction
Published online: 23 May 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.21.c7
https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.21.c7
Abstract
This paper adopts a constructional approach as a heuristic to explore the changes undergone by Latin secundum NP ‘according to NP’, considering both its frequency and its network organisation. My data demonstrate a significant syntactic and host-class expansion of secundum NP between the years BC 106 – AD 17 and a support to Barðdal’s (2008) model of productivity. The vocabulary growth curve for the construction also suggests that the productivity of secundum NP remains high in all the periods considered. Finally, the discussion highlights the role played by the social context in stimulating some of the changes observed, which is crucial in order to interpret the quantitative data.
keywords: constructional network, productivity, schematization, expansion, social context, frequency
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Grammatical constructionalisation of secundum NP: A reconstruction
- 3.The secundum NP construction in the Latin Library corpus
- 4. Frequency effects: Productivity and schematicity
- 5. Hapax legomena counts and productivity
- 6.Type frequency counts: Syntactic and host-class expansion of secundum NP
- 6.1Syntactic expansion
- 6.2Host-class expansion
- 7.Accounting for the increase in productivity with Barðdal (2008)
- 8.Analogy and cultural factors at play
- 9.Conclusion
Abbreviations used in the interlinear glosses Notes References
References (56)
Baayen, H. (1993). On frequency, transparency and productivity. In G. Booij, & J. van Marle (Eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1992 (pp. 181–208). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
(2008). Analyzing linguistic data. A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Baayen, R. H. (2009). Corpus Linguistics in Morphology. Morphological Productivity. In A. Lüdeling, & M. Kytö (Eds.), Corpus linguistics. An international handbook. Volume 2 (pp. 899–919). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Barðdal, J. (2008). Productivity: Evidence from case and argument structure in Icelandic. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
(2012). Predicting the Productivity of Argument Structure Constructions. Berkeley Linguistics Society, 32, 467–478.
Barðdal, J., & Gildea, S. (2015). Diachronic construction grammar. Epistemological context, basic assumptions and historical implications. In J. Barðdal, E. Smirnova, & L. Sommerer (Eds.), Diachronic construction grammar (pp. 1–51). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Bybee, J., & Thompson, S. (1997). Three frequency effects in syntax. Reproduced in J. Bybee (2007) (Ed.), Frequency of use and the organization of language (pp. 269–278). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bybee, J. (1985). Morphology. A study of the relation between meaning and form. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
(2003). Mechanisms of change in grammaticization. The role of frequency. In R. Janda, & B. Joseph (Eds.) Handbook of historical linguistics (pp. 602–623). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
(2007a). Introduction. In J. Bybee (Ed.), Frequency of use and the organization of language (pp. 5–23). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Colish, M. L. (1990). The Stoic Tradition from Antiquity to the Early Middle Ages. Volume 2: Stoicism in Christian thought through the sixth century. Leiden: Brill.
Coussé, E. (forthcoming). Grammaticalization, host-class expansion and category change. In K. Van Goethem, M. Norde, E. Coussé, & G. Vanderbauwhede (Eds.), Category change from a constructional perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Ferguson, E. (2003). Background of early Christianity. Third Edition. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans.
Ferrari, L. (1998). A gramaticalização de formas não-finitas como evidência da motivação conceptual do léxico. Revista de Estudos Linguísticos Veredas, 2(1), 103–115.
Gaeta, L., & Ricca, D. (2006). Productivity in Italian word formation: A variable-corpus approach. Linguistics, 44(1), 57–89.
Goldberg, A. (1995). Constructions. A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Guardamagna, C. (2016a). A cognitive-constructional approach to the development of Latin secundum NP. Unpublished PhD thesis. Lancaster University.
(2016b). A diachronic semantic map for the Latin preposition secundum
. Journal of Latin Linguistics, 15(2), 233–279.
Hammond, M. (1976). Latin. A historical and linguistic handbook. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Heine, B. (2004). Grammaticalization. In B. Joseph, & R. Janda (Eds.), The handbook of historical linguistics (pp. 575–601). Oxford: Blackwell.
Heine, B., & Reh, M. (1984). Grammaticalization and reanalysis in African languages. Hamburg: Buske.
Heine, B., & Kuteva, T. (2002). World lexicon of grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambrigde University Press.
Heine, B., & Narrog, H. (2011). Introduction. In H. Narrog, & B. Heine (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of grammaticalization (pp. 1–19). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hilpert, M. (2012). Diachronic collostructional analysis meets the Noun Phrase: Studying many a Noun in COHA. In T. Nevalainen, & E. C. Traugott (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of the history of English (pp. 233–244). New York: Oxford University Press.
(2013a). Corpus-Based approaches to Constructional Change. In T. Hoffmann, & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of construction grammar (pp. 458–476). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
(2013b). Constructional changes in English. Developments in allomorphy, word formation and syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Himmelmann, N. (2004). Lexicalization and grammaticalization: Opposite or orthogonal? In W. Bisang, N. Himmelmann, & B. Wiemer (Eds.), What makes grammaticalization: A look from its fringes and its components (pp. 21–42). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Hollmann, W. B. (2003). Synchrony and diachrony of English periphrastic causatives: A cognitive perspective. Unpublished PhD dissertation. University of Manchester.
Kay, P., & Michaelis, L. (2012). Constructional Meaning and Compositionality. In C. Maienborn, K. von Heusinger, & P. Portner (Eds.), Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning, Volume 3 (pp. 2271–2296). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Kiss, T. (2007). Produktivität und Idiomatizität von Präposition-Substanti-Sequenzen. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft, 26(2), 317–345.
Kühner R., & Holzweissig, F. (1966[1912]). Ausführliche Grammatik der Lateinischen Sprache. Second edition. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung.
Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar. Volume I. Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
(1991). Foundations of cognitive grammar. Volume II. Descriptive application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Lehmann, C. (1995 [1982]). Thoughts on grammaticalization. Munich: LINCOM (Revised second edition of Thoughts on grammaticalization: A programmatic sketch, 1982).
Lichtenberk, F. (1991). Semantic change and heterosemy in grammaticalization. Language, 67(3), 475–509.
Poultney, J. W. (1980). The phonology of ‑nd‑ and the Latin gerundive. In H. J. Izzo (Ed.), Italic and Romance. Linguistic Studies in Honor of Ernst Pulgram. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Rocha, L. F. (1998). Anàlise do caràter polissêmico do vocàbulo latino SECUNDUS. Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Departimento de Letras, Lingüìstica – Grupo Gramàtica & Cognição. Principia Caminhos da Iniciação Cientifica, 3, 173–179.
Sharma, U., & Karma, S. K. (2003). Western political thought. Volume 1: From Plato to Burke. New Delhi: Atlantic.
Štichauer, P. (2009). Morphological productivity in diachrony: The case of the deverbal nouns in ‑mento, ‑zione and ‑gione in Old Italian from the 13th to the 16th Century. In F. Montermini, G. Boyé, & J. Tseng (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 6th Décembrettes (pp. 138–147). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project. [URL]
Traugott, E. C. (1995). Subjectification in grammaticalization. In D. Stein, & S. Wright (Eds.), Subjectivity and subjectivisation (pp. 31–54). Cambridge: Cambrigde University Press.
Traugott, E. C., & Dasher, R. (2002). Regularity in semantic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Traugott, E. C., & Trousdale, G. (2013). Constructionalization and constructional changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Vineis, E. (1998). Latin. In A. Giacalone Ramat, & P. Ramat (Eds.), The Indo-European languages (pp. 261–321). London: Routledge.
Zeldes, A. (2009). Quantifying constructional productivity with slot members. In Proceedings of the NAACL HLT Workshop on Computational Approaches to Linguistic Creativity, June 5th, Boulder, CO (pp. 47–54). Stroudsberg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.
(2011). On the productivity and variability of the slots in German comparative correlative constructions. In M. Konopka, J. Kubczak, C. Mair, & U. H. Štìcha Waßnr (Eds.), Grammar & Corpora, Third International Conference, Mannheim 22nd–24th of September 2009 (pp. 429–449). Tübingen: Narr.
Latin corpus
The Latin Library corpus. Available at [URL] Accessed 28 February
2014.
Cited by (3)
Cited by three other publications
Höder, Steffen
2023. The Devil is in the schema. In Constructional Approaches to Nordic Languages [Constructional Approaches to Language, 37], ► pp. 81 ff.
Dekalo, Volodymyr
2021. Exploring relative degrees of auxiliarization empirically in German modal
constructions with wissen and
verstehen
. In Modality and Diachronic Construction Grammar [Constructional Approaches to Language, 32], ► pp. 53 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
