Volume 26, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0929-998X
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9765
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



This paper investigates the development of the copula construction in Chinese from the perspective of diachronic construction grammar (Traugott & Trousdale 2013). In prior work the development has been conceptualized in a grammaticalization framework, with focus on the individual expression , rather than on its development in the context of both the immediate syntactic frame and also of other constructions such as the demonstrative construction and the copula construction. We show that the copula construction went through various types of expansion and reduction. The change was not unidirectional in the way predicted by a grammaticalization model such as is proposed in e.g. Lehmann (19952004) and Haspelmath (2004).


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Andersen, Henning
    2001 Actualization and the (uni)directionality of change. InHenning Andersen (ed.), Actualization: Linguistic change in progress, 225–248. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.219.11and
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.219.11and [Google Scholar]
  2. Anttila, Raimo
    2003 Analogy: The warp and woof of cognition. InBrian D. Joseph & Richard D. Janda (eds.), The handbook of historical linguistics, 425–440. Oxford: Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470756393.ch10
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756393.ch10 [Google Scholar]
  3. Baayen, R. Harald
    2001Word frequency distributions. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 10.1007/978‑94‑010‑0844‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0844-0 [Google Scholar]
  4. Barðdal, Jóhanna
    2008Productivity: Evidence from case and argument structure in Icelandic. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.8
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.8 [Google Scholar]
  5. Barðdal, Jóhanna, Elena Smirnova, Lotte Sommerer & Spike Gildea
    (eds.) 2015Diachronic Construction Grammar. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.18
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.18 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bergs, Alexander & Gabriele Diewald
    (eds.) 2008Constructions and language change. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110211757
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110211757 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bisang, Walter
    2010 Grammaticalization in Chinese: A construction-based account. InTraugott & Trousdale (eds.), Gradience, gradualness and grammaticalization, 245–277. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.90.13bis
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.90.13bis [Google Scholar]
  8. Blom, Alied & Saskia Daalder
    1977Syntaktische theorie en taalbeschrijving. Muiderberg: Coutinho.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Booij, Geert
    2010Construction morphology. Oxford: OUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Börjars, Kersti, Nigel Vincent & George Walden
    2015 On constructing a theory of grammatical change. Transactions of the philological society113(3). 363–382. 10.1111/1467‑968X.12068
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-968X.12068 [Google Scholar]
  11. Bybee, Joan
    2003 Mechanisms of change in grammaticization: The role of frequency. InBrian D. Joseph & Richard D. Janda (eds.), The handbook of historical linguistics, 602–623. Oxford: Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470756393.ch19
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756393.ch19 [Google Scholar]
  12. 2006Frequency of use and the organization of language. Oxford: OUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Bybee, Joan & James L. McClellan
    2005 Alternatives to the combinatorial paradigm of linguistic theory based on domain general principles of human cognition. Linguistic Review22. 381–410. 10.1515/tlir.2005.22.2‑4.381
    https://doi.org/10.1515/tlir.2005.22.2-4.381 [Google Scholar]
  14. Bybee, Joan, Revere Perkins & William Pagliuca
    1994The evolution of grammar: Tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Chang, Jung-hsing
    2006 The Chinese copula shì and its origin: A cognitive-based approach. Taiwan Journal of Linguistics4(1). 131–156.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Chao, Yuen-ren
    1968A grammar of spoken Chinese. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Chappell, Hilary
    2001Sinitic grammar: Synchronic and diachronic perspectives. Oxford: OUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Chen, Mianhua
    2009 Some issues about construction grammar. Foreign Language Education and Studies5. 337–400.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Croft, William
    2001Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: OUP. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  20. De Smet, Hendrik
    2009 Analysing reanalysis. Lingua119. 1728–1755. 10.1016/j.lingua.2009.03.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2009.03.001 [Google Scholar]
  21. 2012 The course of actualization. Language88. 601–633. 10.1353/lan.2012.0056
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2012.0056 [Google Scholar]
  22. Declerck, Renaat
    1988Studies on copular sentences, clefts and pseudo-clefts. Leuven: Leuven University Press. 10.1515/9783110869330
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110869330 [Google Scholar]
  23. Diewald, Gabriele
    2006 Context types in grammaticalization as constructions. Constructions SV, 1–9.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Diessel, Holger
    1999Demonstratives: Form, function and grammaticalization. Philadelphia: Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.42
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.42 [Google Scholar]
  25. Eckardt, Regine
    2006Meaning change in grammaticalization: An enquiry into semantic reanalysis. Oxford: OUP. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199262601.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199262601.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  26. Feng, Shengli
    1993 The copula in classical Chinese declarative judgment sentences. Journal of Chinese Linguistics21. 277–311.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Fillmore, Charles J. & Paul Kay
    1997 Berkeley Construction Grammar. Available online atwww.icsi.berkeley.edu/~kay/bcg/ConGram.html
  28. Fillmore, Charles J., Paul Kay & Mary Catherine O’Connor
    1988 Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions. Language64. 501–538. 10.2307/414531
    https://doi.org/10.2307/414531 [Google Scholar]
  29. Fischer, Olga
    2007Morphosyntactic change: Functional and formal perspectives. Oxford: OUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Givón, Talmy
    1979On understanding grammar. New York, NY: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. 1991 The evolution of dependent clause morpho-syntax in Biblical Hebrew. InElizabeth Closs Traugott & Bernd Heine (eds.), Approaches to grammaticalizationVol.II., 257–310. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.19.2.14giv
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.19.2.14giv [Google Scholar]
  32. Goldberg, Adele E.
    1995Constructions: A Construction Grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. 2006Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: OUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Haspelmath, Martin
    1998 Does grammaticalization need reanalysis?Studies in Language22. 315–351. 10.1075/sl.22.2.03has
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.22.2.03has [Google Scholar]
  35. 2004 On directionality in language change with particular reference to grammaticalization. InOlga Fischer, Muriel Norde & Harry Perridon (eds.), Up and down the cline: The nature of grammaticalization, 17–44. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.59.03has
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.59.03has [Google Scholar]
  36. Heine, Bernd
    1997Cognitive foundations of grammar. New York, NY: OUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Heine, Bernd, Ulrike Claudi & Friederike Hünnemeyer
    1991Grammaticalization: A conceptual framework. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Heine, Bernd & Tania Kuteva
    2002World lexicon of grammaticalization. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9780511613463
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511613463 [Google Scholar]
  39. Hengeveld, Rob
    1992Dynamic biogeography. New York, NY: CUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Higgins, Roger Francis
    1979The pseudo-cleft construction in English. New York, NY: Garland.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Hilpert, Martin
    2013Constructional change in English: Developments in allomorphy, word-formation and syntax. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9781139004206
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139004206 [Google Scholar]
  42. Hilpert, Martin & Stefan Th. Gries
    2016 Quantitative approaches to diachronic corpus linguistics. InMerja Kytö & Päivi Pahta (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of English historical linguistics, 36–53. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9781139600231.003
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139600231.003 [Google Scholar]
  43. Himmelmann, Nikolaus P.
    2004 Lexicalization and grammaticization: Opposite or orthogonal?InWalter Bisang, Nikolaus P. Himmelmann & Björn Wiemer (eds.), What makes grammaticalization: A look from its fringes and its components, 21–42. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Hoffmann, Thomas & Graeme Trousdale
    2013a Introduction. InThomas Hoffmann & Graeme Trousdale (eds.), 1–12.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. (eds.) 2013bThe Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar. New York, NY: OUP. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  46. Hopper, Paul J. & Elizabeth Closs Traugott
    2003Grammaticalization (revised edn.). Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9781139165525
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139165525 [Google Scholar]
  47. Hong, Cheng
    1957 Lun Nanbeichao yiqian de xici ‘On the copula before the Nanbei Dynasty’. Yuyan Yanjiu2. 1–22.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Huang, C.-T. James
    1982 Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Phd Thesis.
  49. Huddleston, Rodney
    2002 The clause complements. InRodney Huddleston & Geoffrey K. Pullum, The Cambridge grammar of the English language, ch4. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/9781316423530.005
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316423530.005 [Google Scholar]
  50. Kiparsky, Paul
    2012 Grammaticalization as optimization. InDianna Jonas, John Whitman & Andrew Garrett (eds.), Grammatical change: Origins, nature, outcomes, 15–51. Oxford: OUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Kuryłowicz, Jerzy
    1975 [1965] The evolution of grammatical categories. InJerzy Kuryłowicz, Esquisses linguistiques, Vol.II. 38–54. Munich: Fink. (Originally published inDiogenes51. 55–71 1965.)
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Langacker, Ronald W.
    1977 Syntactic reanalysis. InCharles N. Li (ed.), Mechanisms of syntactic change, 57–139. Austin: University of Texas Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. 1991Foundations of cognitive grammar, vol.2. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Lehmann, Christian
    1985 Grammaticalization: Synchronic variation and diachronic change. Lingua e StileXX. 303–318.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. 1995Thoughts on Grammaticalization. Munich: LINCOM EUROPA (2nd, rev. edn.ofThoughts on grammaticalization: a programmatic sketch 1982).
    [Google Scholar]
  56. 2004 Theory and method in grammaticalization. Zeitschrift für germanistische linguistik32. 152–187. 10.1515/zfgl.2004.32.2.152
    https://doi.org/10.1515/zfgl.2004.32.2.152 [Google Scholar]
  57. Li, Charles N. & Sandra A. Thompson
    1976 Subject and Topic: A new typology. InCharles N. Li (ed.), Subject and topic, 458–489. New York, NY: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. 1977 A mechanism for the development of copula morphemes. InCharles N. Li (ed.), Mechanisms of syntactic change, 419–444. Austin: University of Texas Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. 1981Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Lu, Jianming
    2004 The construction grammar and study of Chinese. Chinese Language5. 412–479.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Ma, Jianzhong
    1898Mashi wentong ‘Ma’s grammar’. Beijing: Commercial Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Meillet, Antoine
    1958 [1912] L’évolution des formes grammaticales. InAntoine Meillet, Linguistique historique et linguistique générale, 130–148. Paris: Champion. (Originally published inScientia (Rivista di scienza)XXII 1912)
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Narahara, Tomiko
    2002The Japanese copula: forms and functions. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230504530
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230504530 [Google Scholar]
  64. Noël, Dirk
    2007 Diachronic construction grammar and grammaticalization theory. Functions of Language14. 177–202. 10.1075/fol.14.2.04noe
    https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.14.2.04noe [Google Scholar]
  65. Patten, Amanda L.
    2012The English IT-cleft: A constructional account and a diachronic investigation. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110279528
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110279528 [Google Scholar]
  66. Peng, Rui
    2013 A diachronic construction grammar account of the Chinese cause-complement pivotal construction. Language Sciences40. 53–79. 10.1016/j.langsci.2013.03.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2013.03.004 [Google Scholar]
  67. Petré, Peter
    2014Constructions and environments: Copular, passive and related constructions. Oxford: OUP. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199373390.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199373390.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  68. Peyraube, Alain
    1996 Recent Issues in Chinese Historical Syntax. InC.-T. J. Huang & Y.-H. A. Li (eds.), New horizons in Chinese linguistics, 161–213. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 10.1007/978‑94‑009‑1608‑1_6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-1608-1_6 [Google Scholar]
  69. Peyraube, Alain & Thekla Wiebusch
    1994 Problems relating to the history of different copulas in ancient Chinese. InMatthew Y. Chen & Ovid J. L. Tseng (eds.), In Honor of William S-Y. Wang: interdisciplinary studies on language and language change, 383–404. Taipei: Pyramid Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Pines, Yuri
    2002 Lexical Changes in Zhanguo Texts. Journal of the American Oriental Society122(4). 691–705. 10.2307/3217610
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3217610 [Google Scholar]
  71. Pustet, Regina
    2003 Copulas: Universals in the Categorization of the Lexicon. Oxford studies in typology and linguistic theory. Oxford: OUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Pulleyblank, Edwin G.
    1995Outline of classical Chinese grammar. Vancouver: UBC Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Roberts, Ian
    1993 A formal account of grammaticalization in the history of Romance futures. Folia Linguistica HistoricaXIII. 219–258.
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Sag, Ivan A.
    2012 Sign-based construction grammar: An informal synopsis. InHans C. Boas & Ivan A. Sag (eds.), Sign-based construction grammar, 69–202. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Shi, Yuzhi & Na Li
    2001Hanyu yufahua de lichen – xingtai jufa fazhan de dongyin he jizhi ‘The path of Chinese grammaticalization – the motivation and mechanism of mophosyntactic change’. Beijing: Beijing University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Smirnova, Elena
    2015 Constructionalization and constructional change: The role of context in the development of constructions. InJóhanna Barðdal, Elena Smirnova, Lotte Sommerer & Spike Gildea (eds.), Diachronic construction grammar, 81–106. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.18.03smi
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.18.03smi [Google Scholar]
  77. Stassen, Leon
    1997Intransitive predication. Oxford: OUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Takahito, Yamada
    2004 Mengzi de Chengshu Niandai ‘The date of Mengzi’. Limingguan Dongyang ShixueNo.27.
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Tang, Yuming
    1991Zhuming zhongnian yuyanxuejia zixuanji ‘Self-selected articles from famous middle aged linguists’. Hefei: Anhui Education Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
    2011 Grammaticalization and mechanisms of change. InBernd Heine & Heike Narrog (eds.), The Oxford handbook of grammaticalization, 19–30. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Richard B. Dasher
    2002Regularity in semantic change. Cambridge: CUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Trousdale, Graeme
    2013Constructionalization and constructional changes. Oxford: OUP. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  83. Trousdale, Graeme
    2010 Issues in constructional approaches to grammaticalization in English. InKaterina Stathi, Elke Gehweiler & Ekkehard König (eds.), Grammaticalization: Current views and issues, 51–72. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.119.05tro
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.119.05tro [Google Scholar]
  84. Wang, Hongjun
    1987 Guanyu Mingcihua biaoji “zhi” de Xiaoshi ‘The disappearance of the nominalizer ‘zhe’’. Yuyanxue luncong4. 158–196.
    [Google Scholar]
  85. Wang, Li
    1937 Zhongguo Wenfa zhong de Xici ‘The linking verb in Chinese gammar’. InLi Wang 1958 Hanyushi lunwenji, 212–276. Beijing: Beijing Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  86. 1958Hanyushi lunwenji ‘The collection of articles on the history of Chinese’. Beijing: Beijing Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  87. Wei, Shimin
    2002 Shishuoxinyu ji Zhu Chengshu Niandai Kao ‘The dates of Shishuoxinyu and its commentary’. Changzhou Shizhuan Xuebao3. 19–20.
    [Google Scholar]
  88. Xu, Liejiong & Danqing Liu
    1998The structure and functions of Topics. Shanghai: Education Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  89. Yang, Bojun
    1981Chunqiu Zuozhuan zhu ‘The commentary of Chunqiu Zuozhuan’. Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju.
    [Google Scholar]
  90. Yen, Sian L.
    1986 The origin of the copula shì in Chinese. Journal of Chinese Linguistics14(2). 227–241.
    [Google Scholar]
  91. Zhan, Fangqiong & Chaofen Sun
    2013 A copula analysis of shì in the Chinese cleft construction. Language and Linguistics14(4). 755–789.
    [Google Scholar]
  92. Zhan, Fangqiong & Elizabeth Closs Traugott
    2015 The constructionalization of the Chinese cleft construction. Studies in Language39(2). 459–491. 10.1075/sl.39.2.06zha
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.39.2.06zha [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error