Cover not available

Article published In: Functions of Language
Vol. 25:3 (2018) ► pp.363–391

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Adapting to survive

The English absolute and its new functional niche

 | University of Leuven
Published online: 2 November 2018
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.15046.pol
Abstract
This paper traces the semantic development of the English absolute construction from Old to Present-day English on the basis of extensive corpus data. It is observed that the absolute construction developed from a solely adverbial, strictly subordinate construction into a construction with a much larger range of functions, including quasi-coordinate constructions whose ‘addition’ function comes close to that of and-coordinated finite clauses. This development involves an expansion of clausal status (from subordinate to anywhere between subordinate and quasi-coordinate) and a semantic expansion from typically adverbial meanings to any type of additional information. The process is claimed to have been facilitated by Middle English case loss and arguments for this facilitating role of case loss are adduced. It is then shown how these quasi-coordinate absolute constructions became more and more important as an absolute construction-function over time, as they were well-suited to the absolute construction’s high degree of syntactic independence. This evolution appears to have taken an opposite direction from the development of free adjuncts (Killie, Kristin & Toril Swan. 2009. The grammaticalization and subjectification of adverbial -ing clauses (converb clauses) in English. English Language and Linguistics 131. 337–363. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar: 339). This observation fits in well with the proposal that English ing-clauses form a network (Pol, Nikki van de & Lauren Fonteyn. 2015. Divide and conquer: The formation and functional dynamics of the Modern English ing-clause network. English Language and Linguistics 201. 185–219.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar) in which each member maintains its own functional niche, rather than engaging in competition with one another.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Methodology
    • 2.1Absolutes and free adjuncts identified
    • 2.2Data
    • 2.3Semantic categorization
      • 2.3.1The five categories of AC semantics
      • 2.3.2A syntactic and functional interpretation of AC semantics
      • 2.3.3Dealing with semantic indeterminacy
  • 3.The semantic history of ACs
    • 3.1Global development
    • 3.2Zooming in on Old and Middle English: Case syncretism as an enabling factor
    • 3.3The inverse development of free adjuncts
  • 4.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Corpora
  • References
References (46)
Corpora
BNC: The British National Corpus, later part 20th century, 100 m words. Department of Linguistics, University of Oxford. [URL].
Huber, Magnus, Magnus Nissel, Patrick Maiwald & Bianca WidlitzkiOBC: Huber, Magnus, Magnus Nissel, Patrick Maiwald & Bianca Widlitzki. 2012. The Old Bailey Corpus. Spoken English in the 18th and 19th Centuries. [URL].
Manfred Markus, 1150–1500, 7.8m words. Compiled by Manfred Markus. [URL].
PPCEME: The Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Early Modern English, 1500–1710, 1.7 m words. Department of Linguistics, University of Pennsylvania. CD-ROM, 1st edn, [URL].
PPCMBE: The Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Modern British English, 1700–1914, 1 m words. Department of Linguistics, University of Pennsylvania. CD-ROM, 1st edn, [URL].
Anthony Kroch and Ann TaylorPPCME2: The Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Middle English, second edition, 1150–1500, 1.2 m words. Compiled by Anthony Kroch and Ann Taylor. [URL]
Taylor, Ann, Anthony Warner, Susan Pintzuk & Frank BethsYCOE: Taylor, Ann, Anthony Warner, Susan Pintzuk & Frank Beths. 2003. The York-Toronto-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Old English Prose. University of York. [URL].
D. Geens, L. K. Engels and W. Martin, 1965–1972, 1m words. Compiled by D. Geens, L. K. Engels and W. Martin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
References
Barðdal, Jóhanna. 2013. Historical-comparative reconstruction. In Thomas Hoffmann & Graeme Trousdale, The Oxford handbook of construction grammar, 329–344. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bauer, Brigitte. 2000. Archaic syntax in Indo-European. The spread of transitivity in Latin and French. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Behrens, Bergliot & Cathrine Fabricius-Hansen. 2005. The relation accompanying circumstance across languages. Conflict between linguistic expression and discourse subordination? SPRIKreports 32. Available online at [URL].
Berent, G. P. 1973. Absolute constructions as ‘subordinate clauses’. In Claudia Corum, T. Cedric Smith-Stark & Ann Weiser (eds.), You take the high node and I’ll take the low node. Papers from the Comparative Syntax Festival, 147–154. Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cristofaro, Sonia. 2003. Subordination. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E. 1995. Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E. 2006. Constructions at work: The nature of generalisation in language. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2004. An introduction to functional grammar, 3rd edn. London: Arnold.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hannay, Mike & J. Lachlan Mackenzie. 2002. Effective writing in English: A sourcebook. Bussum: Coutinho.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 1995. The converb as a cross-linguistically valid category. In Martin Haspelmath & Ekkehard König (eds.), Converbs in a cross-linguistic perspective, 1–55. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hilpert, Martin. 2013. Constructional change in English. Developments in allomorphy, word formation, and syntax. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hilpert, Martin & Stefan Th. Gries. 2009. Assessing frequency changes in multi-stage diachronic corpora: Applications for historical corpus linguistics and the study of language acquisition. Literary and Linguistic Computing 24(4). 385–401. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney & Geoffrey K. Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1965. A Modern English grammar on historical principles: Part V. London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Killie, Kristin & Toril Swan. 2009. The grammaticalization and subjectification of adverbial -ing clauses (converb clauses) in English. English Language and Linguistics 131. 337–363. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Klemola, Juhani & Markku Filppula. 1992. Subordinating uses of and in the history of English. In Matti Rissanen, Ossi Ihalainen, Terttu Nevalainen & Irma Taavitsainen (eds.), History of Englishes: New methods and interpretations in historical linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kohnen, Thomas. 2004. Text, textsorte, sprachgeschichte: Englische Partizipial- und Gerundialkonstruktionen 1100 bis 1700. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Komen, J. H. M. 1994. Over de ontwikkeling van absolute constructies. Amsterdam: Buijten en Schipperhejn.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
König, Ekkehard & Johan van der Auwera. 1990. Adverbial participles, gerunds and absolute constructions in the languages of Europe. In Johannes Beclert, Giuluano Bernini & Claude Budart (eds.), Toward a typology of European languages, 337–355. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kortmann, Bernd. 1991. Free adjuncts and absolutes in English: Problems of control and interpretation. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kortmann, Bernd. 1995. Adverbial participial clauses in English. In Martin Haspelmath & Ekkehard König (eds.), Converbs in cross- linguistic perspective, 189–237. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leino, Jaakko. 2013. Information Structure. In Thomas Hoffmann & Graeme Trousdale (eds.), The Oxford handbook of construction grammar, 329–344. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levinson, S. C. 1989. A review of relevance. Journal of Linguistics 251. 455–472. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mitchell, Bruce. 1985. Old English syntax. Oxford: Clarendon. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Müller-Lancé, Johannes. 1994. Absolute Konstruktionen vom Altlatein bis zum Neufranzösischen: Ein Epochenvergleich unter Berücksichtigung von Mündlichkeit und Schriftlichkeit. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pol, Nikki van de. 2012. Between copy and cognate: The origin of absolutes in Old and Middle English. In Martine Robbeets & Lars Johanson (eds.), The origins of bound morphology, 297–322. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pol, Nikki van de. 2016. The development of the absolute construction in English: Between bird’s eye view and magnifying glass. Leuven: University of Leuven PhD thesis.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pol, Nikki van de & Hubert Cuyckens. 2013. Gradualness in change in English augmented absolutes. In: Anna Giacalone Ramat, Caterina Mauri & Piera Molinelli (eds.), Synchrony and diachrony: A dynamic interface, 341-366. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pol, Nikki van de & Hubert Cuyckens. 2014. The diffusion of English absolutes: A diachronic register study. In Kristin Davidse, Caroline Gentens, Lobke Ghesquière & Lieven Vandelanotte (eds.), Corpus interrogation and grammatical patterns [Studies in Corpus Linguistics], 341–365. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pol, Nikki van de & Lauren Fonteyn. 2014. All for one and one for all: The formation, evolution and functions of Modern English ing-clauses. Paper presented at ICEHL, Leuven, 14–18 July 2014.
Pol, Nikki van de & Lauren Fonteyn. 2015. Divide and conquer: The formation and functional dynamics of the Modern English ing-clause network. English Language and Linguistics 201. 185–219.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Río-Rey, Carmen. 2002. Subject control and coreference in Early Modern English free adjuncts and absolutes. English Language and Linguistics 6(2). 309–323. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruppel, Antonia. 2013. Absolute constructions in Early Indo-European [Cambridge Classical Studies]. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stump, G. T. 1985. The semantic variability of absolute constructions. Dordrecht: Reidel. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Timofeeva, Olga. 2010. Non-finite constructions in Old English with special reference to syntactic borrowing from Latin. Mémoires de la Société Néophilologique de Helsinki 80. Jyväskylä: WS Bookwell Oy.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Timofeeva, Olga. 2012. Latin absolute constructions and their Old English equivalents: Interfaces between form and information structure. In Anneli Meurman-Solin, Maria José Lopez-Couso & Bettelou Los, Information structure and syntactic change in the history of English, 228-242. Oxford: OUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Graeme Trousdale. 2013. Constructionalization and constructional changes. Oxford: OUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Visser, Frederikus Theodorus. 1973. An historical syntax of the English language. Vol. II1. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue