Cover not available

Article published In: The Speech Act(ion) of Commenting in Social Media and Beyond
Edited by Robert Külpmann and Rita Finkbeiner
[Pragmatics & Cognition 31:2] 2024
► pp. 318–338

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

Cause and comment

Two functions of non-finite causal constructions

ORCiD logo with link | Freie Universität Berlin
Open Access logo
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.

Open Access publication of this article was funded through a Transformative Agreement with Freie Universität Berlin.

Published online: 17 January 2025
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.24011.kon
Abstract
In this paper, I investigate the functional dimension of non-finite causal constructions, exemplified using the English because X constructions. The analysis identifies two functions of these constructions: expressing causality and commenting. Primarily, non-finite causal constructions express cause or reason. Secondarily, however, speakers can also use these constructions to offer a comment about the expressed cause or reason. These two functions represent two poles on a functional continuum. While some non-finite causal constructions only express causal meaning and some serve predominantly as comments, they usually combine both functions.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The data
  • 3.Causal meaning
  • 4.Pseudo-causal meaning
  • 5.Commenting function
  • 6.Functional continuum of NFC constructions
  • 7.Concluding remarks
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (50)
References
Austin, John L. 1975. How to do things with words (2nd edn.). Edited by James O. Urmson & Marina Sbisà. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bailey, Laura. 2012. Because reasons. linguistlaura. [URL]. (16 August, 2022).
Bell, Allan. 1984. Language style as audience design. Language in Society (13). 145–204. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bergs, Alexander. 2018. Because science! Notes on a variable conjunction. In Elena Seoane, Carlos Acuña-Fariña & Ignacio Palacios-Martínez (eds.), Subordination in English, 43–60. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bisang, Walter. 2014. Overt and hidden complexity: Two types of complexity and their implications. Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 50(2). 127–143. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015. Hidden complexity: The neglected side of complexity and its implications. Linguistics Vanguard 1(1). 177–187. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bohmann, Axel. 2016. Language change because Twitter? Factors motivating innovative uses of because across the English-speaking Twittersphere. In Lauren Squires (ed.), English in computer-mediated communication. Variation, representation, and change, 149–178. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2020. Situating Twitter discourse in relation to spoken and written texts: A lectometric analysis. Eine lektometrische Analyse. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik 87(2). 250–284. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. 2008. The comment clause in English: Syntactic origins and pragmatic development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bruns, Axel & Hallvard Moe. 2014. Structural layers of communication on Twitter. In Katrin Weller, Axel Bruns, Jean Burgess, Merja Mahrt & Cornelius Puschmann (eds.), Twitter and society, 15–28. New York, NY: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Burger, Harald & Martin Luginbühl. 2014. Mündlichkeit und Schriftlichkeit. In Mediensprache. Eine Einführung in Sprache und Kommunikationsformen der Massenmedien (4th edn.), 173–200. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Declerck, Renaat & Susan Reed. 2001. Conditionals: A comprehensive empirical analysis. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Du Bois, John W. 2007. The stance triangle. In Robert Englebretson (ed.), Stancetaking in discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction, 139–182. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eisenstein, Jacob. 2015. Systematic patterning in phonologically-motivated orthographic variation. Journal of Sociolinguistics 19(2). 161–188. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fitzmaurice, Susan. 2004. Subjectivity, intersubjectivity and the historical construction of interlocutor stance: From stance markers to discourse markers. Discourse Studies 6(4). 427–448. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Garber, Megan. 2013. English has a new preposition, because Internet. The Atlantic. [URL]. (16 August, 2022).
Grice, H. Paul. 1975. Logic and conversation. In Peter Cole & Jerry L. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and semantics (vol. 3: Speech acts), 41–58. New York: Academic Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnson, Casey Rebecca. 2023. Some varieties of illocutionary pluralism. In Laura Caponetto & Paolo Labinaz (eds.), Sbisà on speech as action, 121–141. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaltenböck, Gunther, Bernd Heine & Tania Kuteva. 2011. On thetical grammar. Studies in Language 35(4). 852–897. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kanetani, Masaru. 2015. On the new usage of because. Studies in Language and Literature 681. 63–79.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koch, Peter & Wulf Oesterreicher. 1985. Sprache der Nähe — Sprache der Distanz. Mündlichkeit und Schriftlichkeit im Spannungsfeld von Sprachtheorie und Sprachgeschichte. In Olaf Deutschmann, Hans Flasche, Bernhard König, Margot Kruse, Walter Pabst & Wolf-Dieter Stempel (eds.), Romanistisches Jahrbuch, 15–43. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Konvička, Martin. 2019. De verborgen complexiteit van want/omdat X. Internationale Neerlandistiek 57(2). 161–183. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2023. Category membership and category potential: The case of vague because. Lexis. Journal in English lexicology (22). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2024. Because reasons. Non-finite causal constructions in English, German, Dutch, and Czech. Berlin: Freie Universität Berlin PhD dissertation.
Konvička, Martin & Kristin Stöcker. 2020. Because X in Dutch, English, and German. Corpus. GitHub. [URL]. (18 February, 2022).
. 2022. (Non-)ellipses in Dutch, English, and German: The case of because X. Nederlandse Taalkunde 27(3). 333–367. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Landert, Daniela & Andreas H. Jucker. 2011. Private and public in mass media communication: From letters to the editor to online commentaries. Journal of Pragmatics 43(5). 1422–1434. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Maat, Henk Pander & Ted Sanders. 1995. Nederlandse causale connectieven en het onderscheid tussen inhoudelijke en epistemische coherentie-relaties. Leuvense Bijdragen. Leuven Contribution in Linguistics and Philology 841. 349–374.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2000. Domains of use or subjectivity? The distribution of three Dutch causal connectives explained. In Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen & Bernd Kortmann (eds.), Cause, condition, concession, contrast, 57–82. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marwick, Alice E. & danah boyd. 2011. I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media & Society 13(1). 114–133. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McCulloch, Gretchen. 2014. Where “because noun” probably came from. All things linguistic. [URL]. (16 August, 2022).
McGregor, William B. 2013. There are existential constructions and existential constructions: Presumption-invoking existentials in English. Folia Linguistica 47(1). 139–181. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Okada, Sadayuki. 2021. Category-free complement selection in causal adjunct phrases. English Language and Linguistics 25(4). 719–741. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pit, Mirna, Henk Pander Maat & Ted Sanders. 1997. ‘Doordat’, ‘omdat’ en ‘want’. Perspectieven op hun gebruik. Taalbeheersing 19(3). 238–251.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Posner, Roland. 1972. Theorie des Kommentierens: Eine Grundlagenstudie zur Semantik und Pragmatik. Frankfurt am Main: Athenäum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik (eds.). 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rehn, Anneliise. 2015. Because meaning: Language change through iconicity in internet speak. BA thesis. Berkeley, CA: University of California.
Romano, Aja. 2013. We’re all using language differently now, because Internet culture. Daily Dot. [URL]. (17 August, 2022).
Schneider-Mizony, Odile. 2021. Kommentar als Anschlusskommunikation, Informationserweiterung, oder didaktische Intention? In Anne-Françoise Ehrhard-Macris & Gilbert Magnus (eds.), Text und Kommentieren im Deutschen, 17–30. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schnoebelen, Tyler. 2014. Innovating because innovation. Corpus Linguistics. [URL]. (22 February, 2022).
Sommerer, Lotte. 2023. If that’s what she said, then that’s what she said: A usage-based, constructional analysis of pleonastic conditionals in English. Corpus Pragmatics 7. 345–376. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stalnaker, Robert. 2002. Common ground. Linguistics and Philosophy 251. 701–721. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sweetser, Eve E. 1990. From etymology to pragmatics. Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traugott, Elisabeth Closs. 2003. From subjectification to intersubjectification. In Raymond Hickey (ed.), Motives for language change, 124–139. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2010. (Inter)subjectivity and (inter)subjectification: A reassessment. In Kristin Davidse, Lieven Vandelanotte & Hubert Cuyckens (eds.), Subjectification, intersubjectification and grammaticalization, 29–74. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Richard B. Dasher. 2002. Regularity in semantic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Verhagen, Arie. 2005. Constructions of intersubjectivity: Discourse, syntax, and cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Verstraete, Jean-Christophe. 2007. Rethinking the coordinate-subordinate dichotomy: Interpersonal grammar and the analysis of adverbial clauses in English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Whitman, Neal. 2013. Because as a preposition. Quick and Dirty Tips. [URL]. (16 August, 2022).
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Konvička, Martin
2025. Language contact in online spaces. In Dutch and Contact Linguistics [IMPACT: Studies in Language, Culture and Society, 55], ► pp. 559 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 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.

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