Cover not available

In:Explorations in English Historical Syntax
Edited by Hubert Cuyckens, Hendrik De Smet, Liesbet Heyvaert and Charlotte Maekelberghe
[Studies in Language Companion Series 198] 2018
► pp. 77–104

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

Chapter 3
On the differential evolution of simple and complex object constructions in English

 | University of Paderborn
Published online: 13 August 2018
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.198.04roh
Abstract
This article surveys the evolution of object structures in Modern English. In the area of simple constructions, a vast range of prepositional objects and adjuncts have been replaced by direct objects, thus making the latter category considerably more abstract. By contrast, in the area of more complex structures, English has experienced a series of dramatic changes, leading to the virtual loss of several types of construction and the contraction of many others. Most of these reductive changes have introduced a high degree of functional specialization, by narrowing the semantic spectrum of the original syntactic frame or by compelling the use of alternative grammatical devices. The paper provides a corpus-based analysis of three major domains, external possessor constructions, double objects, and clausal complements preceded by direct objects.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Simple object structures: Increased functional diversity
    • 2.1Directive verbs
    • 2.2Body part instruments
    • 2.3Other instrumental objects
  • 3.External possessor constructions
  • 4.Double object constructions
  • 5.Clausal complements after the sequence V+O
    • 5.1 That-clauses
    • 5.2Infinitival complements
    • 5.3Dependent interrogative clauses
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
  • Electronic sources
References (47)
References
Bibovič, Ljiljana. 1976. On the notion of body part instrument. Folia Linguistica 9: 311–324. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Colleman, Timothy. 2011. Ditransitive verbs and the ditransitive construction: A diachronic perspective. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 59: 387–410. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Colleman, Timothy & De Clerck, Bernard. 2011. Constructional semantics on the move: On semantic specialization in the English double object construction. Cognitive Linguistics 22: 183–209. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hawkins, John A. 1986. A Comparative Typology of English and German: Unifying the Contrasts. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. & Thompson, Sandra A. 1980. Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language 56: 251–299. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1927. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles, Part III: Syntax, Vol. 2. London: George Allen & Unwin and Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard. Reprinted 1961 and 1965 by Dickens & Co., Northampton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Keenan, Edward L. & Comrie, Bernard. 1977. Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 8: 63–99.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
. 1957. Recent American influence on standard English: The syntactical sphere. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 5: 29–42.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1959. Zur transitiven und intransitiven Verwendung des englischen Verbums. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 7: 342–399.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
König, Ekkehard & Gast, Volker. 2007. Understanding English-German Contrasts. Berlin: Schmidt.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Legenhausen, Lienhard. 1988. Prototypical lexical causatives and transitional relations to non-causatives. In Essays on the English Language and Applied Linguistics on the Occasion of Gerhard Nickel’s 60th Birthday, Dietrich Nehls (ed.), 131–146. Heidelberg: Groos.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Plank, Frans. 1983. Transparent versus functional encoding of grammatical relations: A parameter for syntactic change and typology. Linguistische Berichte 86: 1–13.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1984. Verbs and objects in semantic agreement: Minor differences between English and German that might suggest a major one. Journal of Semantics 3: 305–360. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rohdenburg, Günter. 1974. Sekundäre Subjektivierungen im Englischen und Deutschen: Vergleichende Untersuchungen zur Verb- und Adjektivsyntax. Bielefeld: Cornelsen, Velhagen & Klasing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1992. Bemerkungen zu infiniten Konstruktionen im Englischen und Deutschen. In New departures in contrastive linguistics/Neue Ansätze in der Kontrastiven Linguistik, Vol. I, Christian Mair & Manfred Markus (eds), 187–207. Innsbruck: Universität Innsbruck.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1995b. On the replacement of finite complement clauses by infinitives in English. English Studies 76: 367–388. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2003. Cognitive complexity and horror aequi as factors determining the use of interrogative clause linkers in English. In Determinants of Grammatical Variation in English, Günter Rohdenburg & Britta Mondorf (eds), 205–249. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006. The role of functional constraints in the evolution of the English complementation system. In Syntax, Style and Grammatical Norms: English from 1500–2000, Christiane Dalton-Puffer, Dieter Kastovsky, Nikolaus Ritt & Herbert Schendl (eds), 143–166. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009a. 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
. 2009b. Grammatical divergence between British and American English in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. In Current Issues in Late Modern English, Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade & Wim van der Wurff (eds), 300–329. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2014. On the changing status of that-clauses. In Late Modern English Syntax, Marianne Hundt (ed.), 155–181. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017. Formal asymmetries between active and passive clauses in Modern English: The avoidance of preposition stranding with verbs featuring omissible prepositions. Anglia 135. 700–744.
Rudanko, Juhani. 2015. Linking Form and Meaning: Studies on Selected Control Patterns in Recent English. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward. 1921. Language: An Introduction to the Study of Speech. New York NY: Harcourt Brace.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Visser, Fredericus Theodorus. 1963. An Historical Syntax of the English Language, Part one: Syntactical Units with One Verb. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vosberg, Uwe. 2006. Die Große Komplementverschiebung. Außersemantische Einflüsse auf die Entwicklung satzwertiger Ergänzungen im Neuenglischen. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yañez-Bouza, Nuria. 2014. Grammar, Rhetoric and Usage in English: Preposition Placement 1500–1900. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Electronic sources
BNC = British National Corpus 1995. Version 1.0. BNC Consortium/Oxford University Computing Services. (100,000,000 words)Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
EAF = Early American Fiction 2000. Chadwyck-Healey. (34,634,660 words)Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
ECF = Eighteenth-Century Fiction 1996. Chadwyck-Healey. (9,702,696 words)Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
EEPF = Early English Prose Fiction 1997–2000. Chadwyck-Healey. In association with the Salzburg Centre for Research on the English Novel SCREEN. (9,562,865 words)Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
EPD = English Prose Drama 1996–1997. Chadwyck-Healey. (26,454,639 words)Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
ETC = Early Twentieth Century Corpus – a selection of British and American writings by authors born between 1870 and 1894. Source: Project Gutenberg. Compiled in the Research Project “Determinants of Grammatical Variation in English”, University of Paderborn. (16,351,681 words)
ETC/B = British writings in the ETC. (4,801,408 words)
LNC = Late-Nineteenth-Century Corpus – a selection of British and American writings (complementary to the EAF and NCF) by authors born between 1830 and 1869. Source: Project Gutenberg. Compiled in the Research Project “Determinants of Grammatical Variation in English”, University of Paderborn.
LNC/B = British writings in the LNC. (20,817,802 words)
MNC = Mid-Nineteenth-Century Corpus – a selection of British and American writings (complementary to the EAF and the NCF) by authors born between 1803 and 1829. Source: Project Gutenberg. Compiled in the Research Project “Determinants of Grammatical Variation in English”, University of Paderborn.
MNC/B = British writings in the MNC. (10,082,876 words)
NCF = Nineteenth-Century Fiction 1999–2000. Chadwyck-Healey. (37,589,837 words)Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
NCF1 = First part of the NCF containing only those authors born in the eighteenth century (*1728–*1799).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
NCF2 = Second part of the NCF containing only those authors born in the nineteenth century (*1800–*1869).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
OED = The Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd edn on CD-ROM 1992 (Version 1.10). Edited by John A. Simpson & Edmund S. C. Weiner. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
t90, t92, t94 = The Times & The Sunday Times on CD-ROM 1990, 1992, 1994. Chadwyck-Healey/ProQuest. (119,476,791 words)Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
wridom1 = fictional component of the BNC (18,863,529 words)
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Bouso, Tamara
2020. The growth of the transitivising Reaction Object Construction. Constructions and Frames 12:2 ► pp. 239 ff. DOI logo
Rohdenburg, Günter
2019. Further explorations in the grammar of intensifier marking in Modern English. In Developments in English Historical Morpho-syntax [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory, 346], ► pp. 269 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