In:Developments in English Historical Morpho-Syntax
Edited by Claudia Claridge and Birte Bös
[Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 346] 2019
► pp. 247–268
Variation and change at the interface of syntax and semantics
Concessive clauses in American English
Published online: 27 May 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.346.12sch
https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.346.12sch
Abstract
Based on the Corpus of Historical American English (COHA), this chapter inspects diachronic changes of constructions involving the concessive conjunctions although, though and even though from the 1860s to the present day. Following a short summary of changes in semantics and clause structures, the main focus lies on factors that have an effect on the position of the subordinate clause relative to the matrix clause. A Bayesian logistic regression model is used to investigate in how far the position of a subordinate clause can be predicted from the semantics of the entire construction, the connective that is used, and the weight (or length) of the complement, and whether the preferred positions of subordinate clauses change over time.
Keywords: concessives, conjunctions, American English, syntax, Corpus Linguistics
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Theoretical background and previous research
- 2.1Three semantic types of concessives
- 2.2‘Contrastive sequencing’
- 3.Methodology
- 4.Results
- 4.1Semantics
- 4.2Complement-internal syntax
- 4.3Complement length
- 4.4Multifactorial analysis of contrastive sequencing
- 5.Discussion, conclusion and outlook
Notes References Appendix
References (47)
Aarts, Bas (1988). Clauses of Concession in Written Present-Day British English. Journal of English Linguistics 21(1), 39–58.
Altenberg, Bengt (1986). Contrastive Linking in Spoken and Written English. In Gunnel Tottie, & Ingegerd Bäcklund (Eds.), English in Speech and Writing. A Symposium (13–40). Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.
Anscombre, Jean-Claude (1989). Théorie de l’Argumentation,Topoï, et Structuration Discursive. Revue Québécoise de Linguistique 18(1), 13–55.
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan, & Finegan, Edward (1999). Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.
Bürckner, Paul-Christian (2016). brms: Bayesian Regression Models using Stan. R package version 1.3.0. Retrieved from [URL]
Chafe, Wallace L. (1976). Givenness, Contrastiveness, Definiteness, Subjects, Topics, and Point of View. In Charles N. Li (Ed.), Subject and Topic (27–55). New York: Academic Press.
(1984). How People Use Adverbial Clauses. Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 437–449.
Crevels, Mily (2000). Concessives on Different Semantic Levels: A Typologocal Perspective. In Elisabeth Couper-Kuhlen, & Bernd Kortmann (Eds.), Cause – Condition – Concession – Contrast. Cognitive and Discourse Perspectives (313–339). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Davies, Mark (2010–). The Corpus of Historical American English: 400 million words, 1810–2009. Retrieved from [URL].
Diessel, Holger (2005). Competing Motivations for the Ordering of Main and Adverbial clauses. Linguistics 43(3), 449–470.
(2008). Iconicity of Sequence. A Corpus-based Analysis of the Positioning of Temporal Adverbial Clauses in English. Cognitive Linguistics 19, 457–482.
Finegan, Edward (1995). Subjectivity and subjectivisation: an introduction. In Dieter Stein, & Susan Wright (Eds.), Subjectivity and Subjectivisation. Linguistic Perspectives (1–15). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ford, Cecilia E. (1993). Grammar in Interaction. Adverbial Clauses in American English Conversations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gelman, Andrew, & Pardoe, Iain (2007). Average Predictive Comparisons for Models with Nonlinearity, Interactions, and Variance Components. Sociological Methodology 37(1), 23–51.
Gelman, Andrew, Carlin, John B., Stern, Hal S., Dunson, David B., Vehtari, Aki, & Rubin, Donald B. (2013). Bayesian Data Analysis. Boca Raton, Fla.: CRC Press.
Goldberg, Adele E. (2003). Constructions: a new theoretical approach to language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7(5), 219–224.
Hawkins, John A. (1994). A Performance Theory of Order and Constituency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
(1998). Some Issues in a Performance Theory of Word Order. In Anna Siewierska (Ed.), Constituent Order in the Languages of Europe (729–780). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Hermodsson, Lars (1994). Der Begriff ‘konzessiv’. Terminologie und Analysen. Studia Neophilologia 66, 59–75.
Hilpert, Martin (2013). Constructional Change in English: Developments in Allomorphy, Word Formation, and Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Huddleston, Rodney D., & Pullum, Geoffrey K. (2002). The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
König, Ekkehard (2006). Concessive Clauses. In Keith Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (Vol. II, 820–824). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Krifka, Manfred (2008). Basic Notions of Information Structure. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 55(3–4), 243–276.
Kruschke, John K. (2015). Doing Bayesian Data Analysis. A Tutorial with R, JAGS, and Stan. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Lambrecht, Knud (1996). Information Structure and Sentence Form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lang, Ewald (2000). Adversative Connectors on Distinct Levels of Discourse: A Re-examination of Eve Sweetser’s Three-level Approach. In Elisabeth Couper-Kuhlen, & Bernd Kortmann (Eds.), Cause – Condition – Concession – Contrast. Cognitive and Discourse Perspectives (235–256). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
McElreath, Richard (2016). Statistical Rethinking. A Bayesian Course with Examples in R and Stan. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
di Meola, Claudio (1998). Zur Definition einer logisch-semantischen Kategorie: Konzessivität als ‘versteckte Kausalität’. Linguistische Berichte 175, 329–352.
Oxford English Dictionary Online. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [URL] [accessed 22/2/2017].
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey, & Svartvik, Jan (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Arnold.
R Development Core Team. (2016). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Version 3.2.4. [computer program] Retrieved from [URL]
Radford, Andrew (1981). Transformational Syntax: A Student’s Guide to Chomsky’s Extended Standard Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ramsay, Violetta (1987). The Functional Distribution of Preposed and Postposed ‘if’ and ‘when’ Clauses in Written Discourse. In Russell Tomlin (Ed.), Coherence and Grounding in Discourse (383–408). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
RStudio Team. (2009-2016). RStudio: Integrated Development for R. Version 1.0.136. Boston, MA: RStudio, Inc. Retrieved from [URL]
Sarkar, Deepayan (2014). lattice: Lattice graphics. R-package version 0. 20–29. Retrieved from [URL]
Schützler, Ole (2017). A corpus-based study of concessive conjunctions in three L1-varieties of English. In Isabelle Buchstaller, & Beat Siebenhaar (Eds.), Language Variation – European Perspectives VI. Selected papers from the Eighth International Conference on Language Variation in Europe (ICLaVE 8), Leipzig, May 2015 (173–184). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
(2018a). Grammaticalization and information structure: Two perspectives on diachronic changes of notwithstanding in written American English. English Language and Linguistics 22(1), 101–122.
(2018b). Concessive conjunctions in written American English: Diachronic and genre-related changes in frequency and semantics. In Richard J. Whitt (Ed.), Diachronic Corpora, Genre, and Language Change (195-218). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Stan Development Team. (2016). Stan Modeling Language Users Guide and Reference Manual, Version 2.12.0. Retrieved from [URL]
Sweetser, Eve E. (1990). From Etymology to Pragmatics: Metaphorical and Cultural Aspects of Semantic Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tsunoda, Mie (2012). Five-level Classification of Clause Linkage in Japanese. Studies in Language 36(2), 382–429.
Vehtari, Aki, Gelman, Andrew, & Gabry, Jonah (2017). Practical Bayesian Model Evaluation Using Leave-one-out Cross-validation and WAIC. Statistics and Computing. 27(5), 1413–1432.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 6 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.
