Cover not available

In:English Noun Phrases from a Functional-Cognitive Perspective: Current issues
Edited by Lotte Sommerer and Evelien Keizer
[Studies in Language Companion Series 221] 2022
► pp. 235–276

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

Premodification in X-is constructions

Fact and point

 | University of Vienna
Published online: 21 January 2022
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.221.07kei
Abstract
Although most studies on the X-is construction (thing-is, fact-is, point-is, etc.) acknowledge that premodification is allowed, very little attention has been paid to this property of the construction. Focusing on instances with the head nouns fact and point, this paper seeks to find out which premodifiers can be found in these constructions, and how the development of the construction from a fully specificational copular sentence with a referential subject NP to a non-specificational semi-fixed focus marker affects the type and range of premodifiers allowed. On the basis of data from the British National Corpus (Davies 2004), a number of tendencies and restrictions are identified in terms of (i) token and type frequencies of the premodifiers, as well as type-token-ratio (TTR), and (ii) the class and function of the premodifiers. It is concluded that, as constructionalization takes place, the premodifier position becomes constrained. In addition, it is shown that non-specificational constructions clearly prefer subjective modifiers, which, due to an increase in scope, come to serve a different function (e.g. attitudinal, intensifying, or downtoning). It is argued that the changes observed follow from the gradual changes taking place in the internal structure of the constructions in question. Finally, the theory of Functional Discourse Grammar is used to capture these changes and to explain the consequences of these changes both for the fact-is and point-is constructions in general and for the classes of premodifiers allowed (or preferred).
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Preliminaries
  • 3.The fact-is and point-is constructions
    • 3.1Function and form
    • 3.2Specificational vs. non-specificational constructions
  • 4.Premodification in the fact-is and point-is constructions
    • 4.1Premodification patterns for fact and point
      • 4.1.1Most frequent premodifiers
      • 4.1.2Classes of premodifiers
    • 4.2Correlation between premodifier and construction type
      • 4.2.1Premodifier vs. construction type: Fact
      • 4.2.2Premodifier vs. construction type: Point
    • 4.3Summary
  • 5.FDG analysis
    • 5.1Introduction to FDG
      • 5.1.1Overall characterization
      • 5.1.2Levels of analysis
        • 5.1.2.1The Interpersonal Level
        • 5.1.2.2The Representational Level
        • 5.1.2.3The Morphosyntactic Level
    • 5.2Premodification in constructions with fact and point
      • 5.2.1Fact/point as fully lexical nouns
      • 5.2.2The fact-is and point-is constructions as focus-cum-contrast markers
      • 5.2.3The fact-is and point-is constructions as focality markers
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
  • Corpus
  • Appendix
References (52)
References
Aijmer, Karin. 2007. The interface between discourse and grammar: The fact is that. In Connectives as Discourse Landmarks [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 161], Agnes Celle & Ruth Huart (eds), 31–46. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bache, Carl. 2000. Essentials of Mastering English: A Concise Grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bellert, Irena. 1977. On semantic and distributional properties of sentential adverbs. Linguistic Inquiry 8(2): 337–50.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan & Finegan, Edward. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Pearson Education.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brems, Lieselotte. 2011. Layering of Size and Type Noun Constructions in English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brems, Lieselotte & Davidse, Kristin. 2010. The grammaticalisation of nominal type noun constructions with kind/sort of: Chronology and paths of change. English Studies 91(2): 180–202. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brenier, Jason M. & Michaelis, Laura A. 2005. Optimization via syntactic amalgam: Syntax-prosody mismatch and copula doubling. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 1(1): 45–88. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. & Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2005. Lexicalization and Language Change. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carter, Ronald & McCarthy, Michael. 2006. Cambridge Grammar of English. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davidse, Kristin. 2009. Complete and sort of: From identifying to intensifying? Transactions of the Philological Society 107(3): 262–292. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Declerck, Renaat. 1988. Studies on Copular Sentences, Clefts and Pseudoclefts. Leuven: Leuven University Press/Fortis Publications. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ernst, Thomas. 2002. The Syntax of Adjuncts. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Feist, Jim. 2009. Premodifier order in English nominal phrases: A semantic account. Cognitive Linguistics 20(2): 301–340. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. Premodifiers in English: Their Structure and Significance. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Flowerdew, John & Forest, Richard W. 2015. Signalling Nouns in English: A Corpus-Based Discourse Approach. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fraser, Bruce. 1996. Pragmatic markers. Pragmatics 6: 167–190. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ghesquière, Lobke. 2014. The Directionality of (Inter)subjectification in the English Noun Phrase. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael & Hasan, Ruqaiya. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. 1985. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Arnold.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. & Matthiessen, Christian M. I. M. 2014. An Introduction to Functional Grammar, 4th edn, revised by Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haumann, Dagmar. 2007. Adverb Licensing and Clause Structure in English [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 105]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hengeveld, Kees. 1989. Layers and operators in Functional Discourse Grammar. Journal of Linguistics 25(1): 127–157. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1997. Adverbs in Functional Grammar. In Toward a Functional Lexicology, Gerd Wotjak (ed.), 126–136. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017. A hierarchical approach to grammaticalization. In The grammaticalization of Tense, Aspect, Modality, and Evidentiality: A Functional Perspective, Kees Hengeveld, Heiko Narrog & Hella Olbertz (eds), 13–38. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hengeveld, Kees & Mackenzie, J. Lachlan. 2008. Functional Discourse Grammar. Oxford: OUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Higgins, Francis R. 1979. The Pseudo-Cleft Construction in English. New York NY: Garland.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray S. 1972. Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Keizer, Evelien. 2007. The English Noun Phrase: The Nature of Linguistic Categorization. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. The X is (is) construction: An FDG account. In Casebook in Functional Discourse Grammar [Studies in Language Companion Series 137], J. Lachlan Mackenzie & Hella Olbertz (eds), 213–248. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2016. The (the) fact is (that) construction in English and Dutch. In Outside the Clause: The Form and Function of Extra-Clausal Constituents [Studies in Language Companion Series 178], Gunther Kaltenböck, Evelien Keizer & Arne Lohmann (eds), 59–95. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2019. The problem of non-truth-conditional, lower-level modifiers: A Functional Discourse Grammar solution. English Language and Linguistics 24(2), 365–392. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kroon, Carolien. 1995. Discourse Particles in Latin. Amsterdam: Gieben. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Massam, Diana. 1999. Thing is constructions: The thing is, is what’s the right analysis? English Language and Linguistics 3(2): 335–352. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miller, Jim & Weinert, Regina. 1998. Spontaneous Spoken Language: Syntax and Discourse. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oxford English Dictionary (OED) online. Oxford: OUP.
Powell, Mava Jo. 1992. The systematic development of correlated interpersonal and metalinguistic uses in stance adverbs. Cognitive Linguistics 3: 75–110. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pullum, Geoffrey & Huddleston, Rodney. 2002. Adjectives and adverbs. In The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language, Rodney Huddleston & Geoffrey Pullum (eds), 525–595. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey & Svartvik, Jan. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg. 2000. English Abstract Nouns as Conceptual Shells: From Corpus to Cognition. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shibasaki, Reijirou. 2014. On the development of the point is and related issues in the history of American English. English Linguistics 31(1): 79–113. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015. On the grammaticalization of the thing is and related issues in the history of American English. In Studies in the History of the English Language, VI: Evidence and Method in Histories of English, Michael Adams, Laurel Brinton, and Robert D. Fulk (eds), 99–121. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sinclair, John. 1990. The Collins COBUILD English Grammar. London: Collins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A. & Mulac, Antony. 1991a. The discourse conditions for the use of the complementizer that in conversational English. Journal of Pragmatics 15(3): 237–251. [URL].
Thompson, Sandra A. & Mulac, Anthony. 1991b. A quantitative perspective on the grammaticalization of epistemic parentheticals in English. In Approaches to Grammaticalization, Vol. 2 [Typological Studies in Language 19], Elizabeth Closs Traugott & Bernd Heine (eds), 313–329. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1995. Subjectification in grammaticalisation. In Subjectivity and Subjectivisation, Dieter Stein & Susan Wright (eds), 31–54. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010. (Inter)subjectivity and (inter)subjectification. In Subjectification, Intersubjectification and Grammaticalization, Kristin Davidse, Lieven Vandelanotte & Hubert Cuyckens (eds), 29–74. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Dasher, Richard B. 2002. Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Trousdale, Graeme. 2013. Constructionalization and Constructional Changes. Oxford: OUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tuggy, David. 1996. The thing is is that people talk that way. The question is is Why? In Cognitive Linguistics in the Redwoods: The Expansion of a New Paradigm in Linguistics, Eugene H. Casad (ed.), 713–752. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Corpus
Davies, Mark. 2004. BYU-BNC: The British National Corpus (1980s–1993). <[URL]>
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Keizer, Evelien, Thomas Schwaiger & Elnora ten Wolde
2022. Modification in Functional Discourse Grammar: State of the art and issues addressed. Open Linguistics 8:1 ► pp. 512 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