Cover not available

In:Changing Structures: Studies in constructions and complementation
Edited by Mark Kaunisto, Mikko Höglund and Paul Rickman
[Studies in Language Companion Series 195] 2018
► pp. 151–167

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

Patterns of direct transitivization and differences between British and American English

 | Universität Bremen
Published online: 22 May 2018
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.195.09cal
Rohdenburg (2009) found that prepositions are increasingly omitted in several types of verbs, marking a shift in complementation from an intransitive pattern with a prepositional object to a transitive pattern featuring a direct object noun phrase. In particular, the decrease of prepositional objects after antagonistic verbs (appeal, battle, fight, protest) and verbs of leaving (depart, escape, flee, resign) has been interpreted in line with an ongoing tendency in the history of English to functionally expand the category of the direct object at the expense of prepositional phrases in particular. Other verbs that are said to allow the preposition-less variant are mentioned only sporadically in the literature but have not yet been examined systematically on a broader empirical basis. This chapter provides corpus data from British and American English suggesting that several other verbs may also be in the process of undergoing direct transitivization.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction: Direct transitivization
  • 2.Lexicographic treatment of the different complementation patterns
    • 2.1 Graduate
    • 2.2 Impact
    • 2.3 Shop
  • 3.Data and methodology
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1 Graduate
    • 4.2 Impact
    • 4.3Shop
  • 5.Discussion and conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
References (27)
References
Algeo, John. 1988. British and American grammatical differences. International Journal of Lexicography 1(1): 1–31. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006. British or American English? A Handbook of Word and Grammar Patterns. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Burnard, Lou. 2007. Reference Guide for the British National Corpus (XML Edition) . < [URL]> (12 August 2016).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Corpus Resource Database (CoRD) . 2016. < [URL]>Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davies, Mark. 2004-. BYU-BNC. Based on the British National Corpus from Oxford University Press. < [URL]>
. 2008-. The Corpus of Contemporary American English , < [URL]>Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010-. The Corpus of Historical American English, < [URL]>Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013-. Corpus of Global Web-Based English: 1.9 Billion Words from Speakers in 20 Countries. < [URL]>Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Galinsky, Hans. 1952. Die Sprache des Amerikaners, Band II: Wortschatz und Wortbildung - Syntax und Flexion. Heidelberg: Kerle.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1974. Amerikanisches und Britisches Englisch. Einführung in Einheit und Verschiedenheit einer Weltsprache, 3rd edn. München: Hueber.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Herbst, Thomas, Heath, David, Roe, Ian F. & Götz, Dieter (eds). 2004. A Valency Dictionary of English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hundt, Marianne. 1998. New Zealand English Grammar - Fact or Fiction? A Corpus-Based Study in Morpho-Syntactic Variation [Varieties of English around the World G23]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. Colonial lag, colonial innovation or simply language change? In One Language, Two Grammars? Differences between British and American English, Günter Rohdenburg & Julia Schlüter (eds), 13–37. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1927. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles, Part III: Syntax, Vol. 2. London: Allen & Unwin and Copenhagen: Munksgaard.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kirchner, Gustav. 1955. Direct transitivation. English Studies 36: 15–23. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1959. Zur transitiven und intransitiven Verwendung des englischen Verbums. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 7(4): 342–399.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1972. Die syntaktischen Eigentümlichkeiten des amerikanischen Englisch,, Band 2. München: Hueber.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English. Online version. < [URL]> (February 2017).
Mair, Christian. 2002. Three changing patterns of verb complementation in Late Modern English: a real-time study based on matching text corpora. English Language and Linguistics 6(1): 105–131. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marckwardt, Albert H. & Quirk, Randolph. 1964. A Common Language: British and American English. London & Washington DC: The British Broadcasting Corporation & The United States Government.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary. Online version < [URL]> (February 2017).
Merriam-Webster’s Learner’s Dictionary.< [URL]> (February 2017).
Oxford English Dictionary, 3rd ed. Revised and updated online version < [URL]> (February 2017).
Rohdenburg, Günter. 2009. Nominal complements. In One Language, Two Grammars? Differences between British and American English, Günter Rohdenburg & Julia Schlüter (eds), 194–211. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rohdenburg, Günter & Schlüter, Julia. 2009. Introduction. In One Language, Two Grammars? Differences between British and American English, Günter Rohdenburg & Julia Schlüter (eds), 1–12. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Xiao, Richard. 2008. Well-known and influential corpora. In Corpus Linguistics: An International Handbook, Vol. 1, Anke Lüdeling & Merja Kytö (eds), 383–457. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Hundt, Marianne & Laetitia van Driessche
2025. Prepositions in English Argument Structure Constructions. In Constructions in Contact 3 [Constructional Approaches to Language, 40], ► pp. 79 ff. DOI logo
Hundt, Marianne, Laetitia Van Driessche & Dirk Pijpops
2022. Epicentral influence via agent‐based modelling. World Englishes 41:3 ► pp. 377 ff. DOI logo
Condamines, Anne
2021. How can one explain “deviant” linguistic functioning in terminology?. Terminology. International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Issues in Specialized Communication 27:2 ► pp. 322 ff. DOI logo
Vartiainen, Turo & Mikko Höglund
2020. Changes in transitivity and reflexive uses of sit (me/myself down) in Early and Late Modern English. In Corpora and the changing society [Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 96], ► pp. 277 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 3 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