Cover not available

In:Corpus Methods for Semantics: Quantitative studies in polysemy and synonymy
Edited by Dylan Glynn and Justyna A. Robinson
[Human Cognitive Processing 43] 2014
► pp. 279–303

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

A diachronic corpus-based multivariate analysis of “I think that” vs. “I think zero”

 | Bangor University
ORCiD logo with link | University College Ghent
 | University of Leuven
Published online: 6 November 2014
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.43.11sha
This corpus-driven study seeks to explain the choice between the zero complement and the that complement constructions, when occurring with the mental state predicate think. Previous studies have identified a range of factors that are argued to explain the alternation patterns. Such studies have also proposed that there is a diachronic drift towards zero complementation. Based on a sample of 9,720 think tokens, from both spoken and written corpora, from between 1560–2012, we test the hypothesis of diachronic change and the effect of eleven proposed factors on the constructional alternation. Using logistic regression, we demonstrate that, contrary to previous studies, there is in fact a diachronic decrease in zero complementation. Moreover, the study also demonstrates the importance of understanding the interaction of the various factors that explain the near-synonymous relation, including, especially, between the spoken and written modes.
References (35)
References
Aijmer, K. (1997). I think – an English modal particle. In T. Swan, & O. Jansen Westvik (Eds.), Modality in Germanic languages: Historical and comparative perspectives (pp. 1–47). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
ANC = American National Corpus (2002). Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bolinger, D. (1972). That’s that . (Janua linguarum. Series Minor, 155). The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bresnan, J., Cueni, A., Nikitina, T., & Baayen, H. (2007). Predicting the dative alternation. In G. Bouma, I. Kraemer, & J. Zwarts (Eds.), Cognitive foundations of interpretation (pp. 69–94). Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Science.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brinton, L.J., & Traugott, E.C. (2005). Lexicalization and language change. (Research Surveys in Linguistics.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
BROWN = Francis, W.N., & Kucera, H. (1979). The Brown Corpus . Department of Linguistics, Brown University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bybee, J. (2002). Cognitive processes in grammaticalization. In M. Tomasello (Ed.), The new psychology of language Vol. II (pp. 145–167). New Jersey: Lawrence ErlbaumGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
CEECS I & II = Corpus of Early English Correspondence Sampler (CEECS) [URL]>.
CEMET = Corpus of Early Modern English texts (Extended version). See De Smet (2005).
CLMETEV = Corpus of Late Modern English texts (Extended version). See De Smet (2005).
COCA = Davies, M. (2008). The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA): 1990–present. Retrieved from [URL].
De Smet, H. (2005). A Corpus of Late Modern English. ICAME Journal , 29, 69–82.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Divjak, D. (2010). Structuring the lexicon: A clustered model for near-synonymy . Berlin & New York: Mouton de GruyterGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Elsness, J. (1984). That or zero: A look at the choice of the object clause connective in a corpus of American English. English Studies , 65, 519–533. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Finnegan, E., & Biber, D. (1995). That and zero complementizers in Late Modern English: Exploring Archer from 1650–1990. In B. Aarts, & C. Meyer (Eds.), The verb in contemporary English: Theory and description (pp. 241–257). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Glynn, D. (2010). Testing the hypothesis: Objectivity and verification in usage-based Cognitive Semantics. In D. Glynn, & K. Fischer (Eds.), Quantitative Cognitive Semantics: Corpus-driven approaches (pp. 239–270). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gries, S. Th. (2013). Statistics for linguistics with R: A practical introduction . 2nd revised edition . Berlin & Boston: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grondelaers S., Speelman, D., & Geeraerts, D. (2008). National variation in the use of er “there”. Regional and diachronic constraints on cognitive explanations. In G. Kristiansen, & R. Dirven (Eds.), Cognitive Sociolinguistics: Language variation, cultural models, social systems (pp. 153–204). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grondelaers, St., Geeraerts, D., & Speelman, D. (2007). A case for cognitive corpus linguistics. In M. Gonzalez-Marquez, I. Mittelberg, S. Coulson, & M. Spivey (Eds.), Methods in Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 149–169). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heylen, K. (2005). A quantitative corpus study of German word order variation. In S. Kepser, & M. Reis (Eds.), Linguistic evidence: Empirical, theoretical and computational perspectives (pp. 241–264). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaltenböck, G. (2004). That or no that – that is the question: On subordinator suppression in extraposed subject clauses. Vienna English Working Papers , 13, 49–68.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kearns, K. (2007a). Epistemic verbs and zero complementizer. English Language and Linguistics , 11, 475–505. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2007b). Regional variation in the syntactic distribution of null finite complementizer. Language Variation and Change , 19, 295–336. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
LAMPETER = Lampeter Corpus of Early Modern English Tracts (1641–1732). Retrieved from [URL].
Palander-Collin, M. (1999). Grammaticalization and social embedding: I THINK and METHINKS in Middle and Early Modern English . Helsinki: Tome LV.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1972). A grammar of contemporary English . London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rissanen, M. (1991). On the history of that/zero as clause object links in English. In K. Aijmer, & B. Altenberg (Eds.), English corpus linguistics: Studies in honor of Jan Svartvik (pp. 272–289). London & New York: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rohdenburg, G. (1996). Cognitive complexity and increased grammatical explicitness in English. Cognitive Linguistics , 7, 149–182. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Speelman, D., & Geeraerts, D. (2010). Causes for causatives: The case of Dutch ‘doen’ and ‘laten’. In T. Sanders, & E. Sweetser (Eds.), Causal categories in discourse and cognition (pp. 173–204). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, S., & Smith, J. (2005). No momentary fancy! The zero ‘complementizer’ in English dialects. English Language and Linguistics , 9, 289–309. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thompson, S.A., & Mulac, A. (1991). A quantitative perspective on the grammaticalization of epistemic parentheticals in English. In E. Traugott, & B. Heine (Eds.), Approaches to grammaticalization (pp. 313–339). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
TIME = Davies, M. (2007). TIME Magazine Corpus (1920s–2000s). Retrieved from [URL].Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Torres Cacoullos, R. & Walker, J.A. (2009). On the persistence of grammar in discourse formulas: A variationist study of that . Linguistics , 47, 1–43. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traugott, E.C., & Dasher, R.B. (2002). Regularity in semantic change . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traugott, E.C., & Konig, E. (1991). The semantics-pragmatics of grammaticalization revisited. In E.C. Traugott, & B. Heine (Eds.), Approaches to grammaticalization, Volume 1. Focus on theoretical and methodological issues (pp. 189–218). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Gong, Liwei & Satoshi Uehara
2024. Encoding of nominal predication constructions: a typological investigation in verb-initial languages. Linguistic Typology 28:2 ► pp. 291 ff. DOI logo
GRIES, STEFAN T.
2023. New Technologies and Advances in Statistical Analysis in Recent Decades. In The Handbook of Usage‐Based Linguistics, ► pp. 561 ff. DOI logo
Shank, Christopher & Koen Plevoets
2018. Investigating the impact of structural factors upon that/zero complementizer alternation patterns in verbs of cognition: a diachronic corpus-based multifactorial analysis. Research in Corpus Linguistics ► pp. 83 ff. DOI logo
Davidse, Kristin, Simon De Wolf & An Van linden
2015. The development of the modal and discourse marker uses of (there/it is/I have)no doubt. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 16:1 ► pp. 25 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 10 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