Article published In: Historical Pragmatics today: Articles in honour of Andreas H. Jucker
Edited by Irma Taavitsainen and Jonathan Culpeper
[Journal of Historical Pragmatics 22:2] 2021
► pp. 164–179
The rise of a concessive “category reassessment” construction
But fear all the same
Published online: 13 October 2022
https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.00051.tra
https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.00051.tra
Abstract
In the Late Modern English period, several expressions arose with concessive ‘despite what might be expected’
meaning, among them anyway, nonetheless and all the same (Lenker, Ursula. 2010. Argument and Rhetoric: Adverbial Connectors in the History of English. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. ). The topic of this paper is the rise of the specialized concessive construction “but (be) X all
the same”. In the full rhetorical formula of which it is a part, X is initially represented as not having properties Y but
nevertheless as having sufficient other relevant properties to be classified as X, as in “…fear. It is not the eye-rolling,
quaking fear seen in police states, but it is fear all the same” (1963 coha). Here the writer concedes that there is fear
despite Y (see Horn, Laurence R. 1991. “Given as New: When Redundant Affirmation Isn’t”. Journal of Pragmatics 15 (4): 313–336. on “redundant information”) and invites the addressee to
reinterpret the initial X retrospectively (see Haselow, Alexander. 2013. “Arguing for a Wide Conception of Grammar: The Case of Final Particles in Spoken Discourse”. Folia Linguistica 47 (2): 375–424. on functions of “final
particles”). Using data mainly from clmet3.0 and coha, I discuss the conventionalization of this construction in
terms of Diachronic Construction Grammar and argue alongside, for example, Goldberg, Adele E. 2004. “Pragmatics and Argument Structure”. In Laurence R. Horn and Gregory Ward (eds), The Handbook of Pragmatics, 538–561. Oxford: Blackwell.; Cappelle, Bert. 2017. “What’s Pragmatics Doing Outside Constructions?” In Ilse Depraetere and Raphael Salkie (eds), Semantics and Pragmatics: Drawing a Line, 115–151. Cham: Springer. and Finkbeiner, Rita. 2019. “Reflections on the Role of Pragmatics in Construction Grammar”. In Rita Finkbeiner (ed), On the Role of Pragmatics in Construction Grammar, special issue of Constructions and Frames 11 (2): 171–192. that pragmatics should be given a larger role in construction grammar than has often been the case in the
past.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Data and methodology
- 3.A brief outline of the rise of the concessive connective marker all the same
- 4.Phrasal adjunct use of all the same in “but (be) X all the same”
- 5.Discussion
- 5.1From a pragmatic perspective
- 5.2From a constructional perspective
- 5.3From a Diachronic Construction Grammar perspective
- 6.Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
Corpora References
References (46)
Hendrik De Smet, Hans-Jürgen Diller and Jukka Tyrkköclmet 3.0. The Corpus of Late Modern English Texts, 1710–1920, version 3.0 (clmet3.0) compiled by Hendrik De Smet, Hans-Jürgen Diller and Jukka Tyrkkö. Leuven University. See: [URL]
Mark Daviescoca Corpus of Contemporary American English. 1990–2019. Compiled by Mark Davies. Brigham Young University. Release March 2020. See: [URL]
Mark Daviescoha Corpus of Historical American English. 1820–2019. Compiled by Mark Davies. Brigham Young University. Release 2021. See: [URL]
eebo Early English Books Online. 1470s to 1690s. Corpus created as part of the Text Creation Partnership. See: [URL]
oed Oxford English Dictionary. 2018. Oxford: Oxford University Press. See: [URL]
Anscombre, Jean-Claude and Oswald Ducrot. 1983. L’argumentation dans la langue [‘Argumentation in Language’]. Brussels: Mardaga.
Barðdal, Jóhanna, Elena Smirnova, Lotte Sommerer and Spike Gildea (eds). 2015. Diachronic Construction Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad and Edward Finegan. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow, Essex: Pearson Education.
Blakemore, Diana. 2002. Relevance and Linguistic Meaning: The Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cappelle, Bert. 2017. “What’s Pragmatics Doing Outside Constructions?” In Ilse Depraetere and Raphael Salkie (eds), Semantics and Pragmatics: Drawing a Line, 115–151. Cham: Springer.
Croft, William. 2001. Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fillmore, Charles J. and Colin F. Baker. 2001. “Frame Semantics for Text Understanding”. Proceedings of WordNet and Other Lexical Resources Workshop, 59–63. Pittsburgh: NAACL.
Fillmore, Charles J., Paul Kay and Mary Catherine O’Connor. 1988. “Regularity and Idiomaticity in Grammatical Constructions”. Language 64 (3): 501–538.
Finkbeiner, Rita. 2019. “Reflections on the Role of Pragmatics in Construction Grammar”. In Rita Finkbeiner (ed), On the Role of Pragmatics in Construction Grammar, special issue of Constructions and Frames 11 (2): 171–192.
Gast, Volker. 2019. “A Corpus-based Comparative Study of Concessive Connectives in English, German and Spanish: The Distribution of Although, Obwohl and Aunque in the Europarl Corpus”. In Óscar Loureda, Inés Recio Fernández, Adriana Cruz and Laura Nadal (eds), Empirical Studies on the Construction of Discourse, 151–191. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Goldberg, Adele E. 1995. Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Goldberg, Adele E. 2004. “Pragmatics and Argument Structure”. In Laurence R. Horn and Gregory Ward (eds), The Handbook of Pragmatics, 538–561. Oxford: Blackwell.
Goldberg, Adele E. 2006. Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Goldberg, Adele E. 2013. “Constructionist Approaches”. In Thomas Hoffmann and Graeme Trousdale (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar, 15–31. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hansen, Maj-Britt Mosegaard. 2008. Particles at the Semantics/Pragmatics Interface: Synchronic and Diachronic Issues: A Study with Special Reference to the French Phasal Adverbs. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Hansen, Maj-Britt Mosegaard. 2012. “The Semantics of Pragmatic Expressions”. In Hans-Jörg Schmid (ed), Cognitive Pragmatics, 589–613. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Haselow, Alexander. 2013. “Arguing for a Wide Conception of Grammar: The Case of Final Particles in Spoken Discourse”. Folia Linguistica 47 (2): 375–424.
Haselow, Alexander. 2019. “Discourse Marker Sequences: Insights into the Serial Order of Communicative Tasks in Real-time Turn Production”. Journal of Pragmatics 146 (1): 1–18.
Horn, Laurence R. 1991. “Given as New: When Redundant Affirmation Isn’t”. Journal of Pragmatics 15 (4): 313–336.
Huddleston, Rodney and Geoffrey K. Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jacobs, Andreas and Andreas H. Jucker. 1995. “The Historical Perspective in Pragmatics”. In Andreas H. Jucker (ed), Historical Pragmatics: Pragmatic Developments in the History of English, 3–33. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Jucker, Andreas H. (ed). 1995. Historical Pragmatics: Pragmatic Developments in the History of English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Jucker, Andreas H. 2017. “Pragmatics and Discourse”. In Laurel J. Brinton and Alexander Bergs (eds), The History of English: Historical Outlines from Sound to Text, 165–184. (Volume 11.) Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
König, Ekkehard. 1986. “Conditionals, Concessive Conditionals and Concessives: Areas of Contrast, Overlap and Neutralization”. In Elizabeth C. Traugott, Alice ter Meulen, Judy Snitzer Reilly and Charles A. Ferguson (eds), On Conditionals, 229–246. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
König, Ekkehard. 2020. “Concessive Markers and Concessive Meaning: Taking Stock of What We Know and Do Not Know”. In Sabrina Zeaiter and Peter Franke (eds), Pioniergeist, Ausdauer, Leidenschaft: Festschrift zur Ehren von Prof. Dr. Jürgen Handke [‘Pioneering Spirit, Perseverance, Passion: Festschrift in Honor of Prof. Dr. Jurgen Handke’], 53–68. Open publication server, Philipps-Universiteit Marburg. ISBN 978-3-8185-0556-1;
Lenker, Ursula. 2010. Argument and Rhetoric: Adverbial Connectors in the History of English. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Michaelis, Laura A. 2019. “Constructions Are Patterns and So Are Fixed Expressions”. In Beatrix Busse and Ruth Möhlig-Falke (eds), Patterns in Language and Linguistics: New Perspectives on a Ubiquitous Concept, 193–220. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Mulder, Jean and Sandra A. Thompson. 2008. “The Grammaticalization of But as a Final Particle in Conversation”. In Ritva Laury (ed). Crosslinguistic Studies of Clause Combining: The Multifunctionality of Conjunctions, 179–204. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Nevalainen, Terttu. 1990. “Modeling Functional Differentiation and Function Loss: The Case of ‘But’”. In Sylvia Adamson, Vivien Law, Nigel Vincent and Susan Wright (eds), Papers from the 5th International Conference on English Historical Linguistics, 337–355. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Petré, Peter. 2019. “How Constructions are Born: The Role of Patterns in the Constructionalization of be going to INF”. In Beatrix Busse and Ruth Möhlig-Falke (eds), Patterns in Language and Linguistics: New Perspectives on a Ubiquitous Concept, 157–192. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech and Jan Svartvik. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London and New York: Longman.
Schmid, Hans-Jörg. 2017. “A Framework for Understanding Linguistic Entrenchment and its Psychological Foundations”. In Hans-Jörg Schmid (ed.), Entrenchment and the Psychology of Language Learning: How we Reorganize and Adapt Linguistic Knowledge, 9–35. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Schwenter, Scott A. 2000. “Viewpoints and Polysemy: Linking Adversative and Causal Meanings of Discourse Markers”. In Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen and Bernd Kortmann (eds), Cause – Condition – Concession – Contrast: Cognitive and Discourse Perspectives, 257–281. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Schwenter, Scott A. and Richard Waltereit. 2010. “Presupposition Accommodation and Language Change: From Additivity to Speech-act Marking”. In Kristin Davidse, Lieven Vandelanotte and Hubert Cuyckens (eds), Subjectification, Intersubjectification and Grammaticalization, 75–102. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Taavitsainen, Irma and Susan Fitzmaurice. 2007. “Historical Pragmatics: What It Is and How to Do It”. In Susan Fitzmaurice and Irma Taavitsainen (eds), Methods in Historical Pragmatics, 11–36. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2004. “Historical Pragmatics”. In Laurence R. Horn and Gregory Ward (eds), The Handbook of Pragmatics, 538–561. Oxford: Blackwell.
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2019. “Constructional Pattern-development in Language Change”. In Beatrix Busse and Ruth Möhlig-Falke (eds), Patterns in Language and Linguistics: New Perspectives on a Ubiquitous Concept, 125–155. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2022a. Ten lectures on a Diachronic Constructionalist Approach to Discourse Structuring Markers. Leiden: Brill.
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2022b. Discourse Structuring Markers in English: A Historical Constructionalist Perspective on Pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs and Graeme Trousdale. 2013. Constructionalization and Constructional Changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Trousdale, Graeme and Elizabeth Closs Traugott. 2021. “Rethinking Constructionalization: The History of by the way”. Paper presented at ISLE 6, Joensuu, June.
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
Serrano-Losada, Mario
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 november 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.
