Cover not available

Article published In: Functions of Language
Vol. 22:2 (2015) ► pp.192–231

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

Comparative modals

(Dis)similar diachronic tendencies

 | University of Leuven & FWO — Research Foundation Flanders
Published online: 10 September 2015
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.22.2.02lin
This article examines modal expressions with the comparative adverbs better, rather and sooner in American English, and assesses to what extent they have grammaticalized. The corpus data offer evidence that the three comparative modal groups exhibit considerable phonetic reduction in the 1810–2009 period studied. Analysis of several aspects of the constructions, such as subject types, temporal reference and comparative meaning, reveals which conditions promoted this erosion. However, the data also indicate that the three groups are semantically and constructionally quite heterogeneous. In fact, this article proposes a grammaticalization scenario for the rather and sooner structures that is different from the one posited for the better structures.
References (51)
Bybee, Joan & William Pagliuca. 1987. The evolution of future meaning. In Anna Ramat, Onofrio Carruba, & Giuliano Beraini (eds.), Papers from the 7th International conference on historical linguistics, 109–122. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan. 1995. The semantic development of past tense modals in English. In Joan Bybee & Suzanne Fleischman (eds.), Modality in grammar and discourse, 503–517. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coates, Jennifer. 1983. The semantics of the modal auxiliaries. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Collins, Peter. 2009. Modals and quasi-modals in English. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coorevits, Laura. 2012. “I would sooner die than do it”: A corpus-based analysis of (would/had/’d) sooner/rather in Late Modern and Present-Day English. Leuven: University of Leuven BA thesis.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davies, Mark. 2010–. The corpus of historical American English: 400 million words, 1810–2009. Available online at [URL].Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Declerck, Renaat. 1991. A comprehensive grammar of English. Tokyo: Kaitakusha.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Denison, David. 1993. English historical syntax: Verbal constructions. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1998. Syntax. In Suzanne Romaine (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language, vol. 4, 1776–1997, 92–329. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Denison, David & Alison Cort. 2010. Better as a verb. In Kristin Davidse, Lieven Vandelanotte & Hubert Cuyckens (eds.), Subjectification, intersubjectification and grammaticalization, 349–383. Berlin: Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Elmer, Willy. 1981. Diachronic grammar: The history of Old and Middle English subjectless constructions (Linguistische Arbeiten 97). Tübingen: Niemeyer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Facchinetti, Roberta, Frank Palmer & Manfred Krug (eds.). 2003. Modality in contemporary English. Berlin: Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga & Anette Rosenbach. 2000. Introduction. In Olga Fischer, Anette Rosenbach & Dieter Stein (eds.), Pathways of change. Grammaticalization in English, 1–38. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Franz, Wilhelm. 1900. Shakespeare-Grammatik. Halle: Niemeyer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goossens, Louis. 1985. The auxiliarization of the English modals. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam, Institute for general linguistics.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hall, Fitzedward. 1881. On the origin of ‘had rather go’ and analogous or apparently analogous locutions. American Journal of Philology 2(7). 281–322. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd. 1993. Auxiliaries: Cognitive forces and grammaticalization. New York, NY: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney. 1988. English grammar. An outline. Cambridge: CUP. 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
Jacobsson, Bengt. 1980. On the syntax and semantics of the modal auxiliary had better . Studia Neophilologica 521. 47–53. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1894. Progress in language, with special reference to English. London: Sonnenschein.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Klinge, Alex. 1993. The English modal auxiliaries. From lexical semantics to utterance interpretation. Journal of Linguistics 29(2). 315–357. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Klippenstein, Rachel. 2012. The Behavior-before-Coding Principle in morphosyntactic change: Evidence from verbal rather . Extended abstracts of the Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America. URL [URL].
Kroch, Anthony & Ann Taylor. 2000. Penn-Helsinki parsed corpus of Middle English. 2nd edn. [URL].
Krug, Manfred. 2000. Emerging English modals: A corpus-based study of grammaticalization. Berlin: Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey. 2003. Modality on the move: The English modal auxiliaries 1961–1992. In Roberta Facchinetti, Frank Palmer, & Manfred Krug (eds.), 225–240. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey, Marianne Hundt, Christian Mair & Nicholas Smith 2009. Change in contemporary English. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lehmann, Christian. 1995 [1982]. Thoughts on grammaticalization: A programmatic sketch, 2nd rev. edn. Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Loureiro-Porto, Lucía. 2010. Verbonominal constructions of necessity with þearf n. and need n.: Competition and grammaticalization from OE to eModE. English Language and Linguistics 141. 373–397. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Middle English Dictionary. [URL].
Mitchell, Keith. 2003. Had better and might as well: On the margins of modality. In Roberta Facchinetti, Frank Palmer, & Manfred Krug (eds.), 131–149. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oxford English Dictionary. [URL].
Palmer, Frank R. 1974. The English verb, 2nd edn. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1979. Modality and the English modals, 1st edn. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1990. Modality and the English modals, 2nd edn. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Perkins, Michael R. 1983. Modal expressions in English. London: Pinter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Plank, Frans. 1984. The modals story retold. Studies in Language 81. 305–364. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stoffel, C. 1887. On had rather and analogous phrases. Taalstudie 81.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Storm, Johan. 1892–1896. Englische Philologie, 2nd edn., 2 Vols1. Leipzig: Reisland.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taylor, Ann, Anthony Warner, Susan Pintzuk & Frank Beths. 2003. The York-Toronto-Helsinki parsed corpus of Old English Prose. University of York. [URL].
Traugott, Elizabeth C. & Richard B. Dasher. 2002. Regularity in semantic change. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van der Auwera, Johan & Astrid De Wit. 2010. The English comparative modals. A pilot study. In Bert Cappelle & Naoaki Wada (eds.), Distinctions in English grammar, offered to Renaat Declerck, 127–147. Tokyo: Kaitakusha.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van der Auwera, Johan, Dirk Noël & An Van linden. 2013. Had better, ’d better and better: Diachronic and transatlantic variation. In Juana I. Marin-Arrese, Marta Carretero, Jorge Arús Hita & Johan van der Auwera (eds.), English modality: Core, periphery and evidentiality, 119–154 (TiEL 75). Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van der Gaaf, Willem. 1904. Transition from the impersonal to the personal construction in Middle English. Heibelberg: Winter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1912. The origin of would rather and some of its analogues. Englische Studien 451. 381–396.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van linden, An. 2012. Modal adjectives: English deontic and evaluative constructions in diachrony and synchrony (TiEL 75). Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Visser, Frederikus Th. 1969–1973. An historical syntax of the English language. 3 Vols1. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Westney, Paul. 1995. Modals and periphrastics in English: An investigation into the semantic correspondence between certain English modal verbs and their periphrastic equivalents. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wood, Jim. 2013. Parasitic participles in the syntax of verbal rather . Lingua 1371. 59–87. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (7)

Cited by seven other publications

Basile, Carmelo Alessandro
2025. Modal better: A corpus‐based investigation in world Englishes. World Englishes 44:3 ► pp. 318 ff. DOI logo
Basile, Carmelo Alessandro & Debra Ziegeler
2025. Rescuing grammaticalization from construction hegemony: the evolution of the modal better . Folia Linguistica DOI logo
Wood, Jim
2025. Microvariation in verbal rather . Linguistic Variation 25:1 ► pp. 123 ff. DOI logo
Rohdenburg, Günter
2021. Nuria Yáñez-Bouza, Emma Moore, Linda van Bergen and Willem B. Hollmann (eds.). 2019.Categories, Constructions, and Change in English Syntax.Studies in English Language. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, xix + 403 pp., 38 figures, 45 tables, £ 95.00.. Anglia 139:2 ► pp. 419 ff. DOI logo
WANG, JIAWEI
2021.  Nuria Yáñez-Bouza, Emma Moore, Linda Van Bergen & Willem B. Hollmann (eds.), Categories, constructions, and change in English syntax (Studies in English Language 63). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2019. Pp. xx + 404.. Journal of Linguistics 57:4 ► pp. 915 ff. DOI logo
Fanego, Teresa
2020. Review of Yáñez-Bouza, Nuria, Emma Moore, Linda Van Bergen and Willem B. Hollmann eds. 2019. Categories, Constructions, and Change in English Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN: 978-1-108-41956-7. htps:// doi.org/10.1017/9781108303576. Research in Corpus Linguistics 8:2 ► pp. 159 ff. DOI logo
Nuria Yáñez-Bouza, Emma Moore, Linda van Bergen & Willem B. Hollmann
2019. Categories, Constructions, and Change in English Syntax, DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 9 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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue