1887
The Structure of the English NP
  • ISSN 0929-998X
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9765
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

This paper provides a detailed comparison of the referential behaviour of noun phrases and nominal and verbal gerunds from Middle to Late Modern English. It will be shown that in earlier stages of English, nominal and verbal gerunds to a large extent resemble prototypical noun phrases in their referential functioning, but also exhibit ‘non-nominal’ uses that depend on clausal rather than nominal grounding strategies. It is argued that the study of (diachronic changes in) the semantic and functional behaviour of nominal and verbal gerunds in Middle and Modern English should take into account that these are functionally hybrid constructions, showing referential traits of both prototypical noun phrases and clauses. This functional hybridity, then, was gradually sorted out, with nominal gerunds specializing to nominal reference and verbal gerunds continuing to adhere to the functional apparatus associated with subordinate clauses.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/fol.23.1.04fon
2016-06-09
2019-11-17
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. CLMET3.0
    = The Corpus of Late Modern English Texts, version 3.0 (CLMET3.0). For details, see Diller et al. (2011).
    [Google Scholar]
  2. PPCME
    = Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Middle English, 2nd ed. For details, see Kroch & Taylor (2000).
    [Google Scholar]
  3. PPCEME
    = Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Early Modern English. For details, see Kroch et al. (2004).
    [Google Scholar]
  4. PPCMBE
    = Penn Parsed Corpus of Modern British English. For details, see Kroch et al. (2010).
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Ackles, Nancy
    1997Historical syntax of the English articles in relation to the count/non-count distinction. Seattle, WA: University of Washington PhD thesis.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Barker, Chris
    2005 Possessive weak definites. In Ji-yung Kim , Yury Lander & Barbara H. Partee (eds.), Possessives and beyond: Semantics and syntax, 89–113. Amherst, MA: GLSA Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Behrens, Leila
    2005 Genericity from a cross-linguistic perspective. Linguistics43(2). 275–344. doi: 10.1515/ling.2005.43.2.275
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2005.43.2.275 [Google Scholar]
  8. Bhat, D.N. Shankara
    1994The adjectival category. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/slcs.24
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.24 [Google Scholar]
  9. Brinton, Laurel
    1998 Aspectuality and countability: A cross-categorial analogy. English Language and Linguistics2(1). 37–63. doi: 10.1017/S136067430000068X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S136067430000068X [Google Scholar]
  10. Davidse, Kristin
    1999 The semantics of cardinal versus enumerative existential constructions. Cognitive Linguistics10(3). 203–250.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. De Smet, Hendrik
    2008 Functional motivations in the development of nominal and verbal gerunds in Middle and Early Modern English. English Language and Linguistics12. 55–102. doi: 10.1017/S136067430700250X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S136067430700250X [Google Scholar]
  12. 2013Spreading patterns: Diffusional change in the English system of complementation. Oxford: OUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Diller, Hans-Jürgen , Hendrik De Smet & Jukka Tyrkkö
    2011 A European database of descriptors of English electronic texts. The European English Messenger19. 21–35.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Donner, Morton
    1986 The gerund in Middle English. English Studies67(5). 394–400. doi: 10.1080/00138388608598465
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00138388608598465 [Google Scholar]
  15. Du Bois , John W
    1980 Beyond definiteness: The trace of identity in discourse. In Wallace Chafe (ed.), The pear stories: Cognitive, cultural and linguistic aspects of narrative production, 203–274. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Duffley, Patrick
    2014Reclaiming control as a semantic and pragmatic phenomenon. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.251
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.251 [Google Scholar]
  17. Emonds, Joseph E
    1973 The derived nominals, gerunds, and participles in Chaucer’s English. In Braj B. Kachru & Robert B. Lees (eds.), Issues in linguistics: Papers in honor of Henry and Renée Kahane, 185–189. Urbana, Il.: University of Illinois Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Fanego, Teresa
    1996a The development of gerunds as objects of subject-control verbs in English. Diachronica13(1). 29–62. doi: 10.1075/dia.13.1.03fan
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.13.1.03fan [Google Scholar]
  19. 1996b On the historical development of English retrospective verbs. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen97(1). 71–79.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. 1998 Developments in argument linking in early Modern English gerund phrases. English Language and Linguistics2(1). 87–119. doi: 10.1017/S1360674300000708
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674300000708 [Google Scholar]
  21. 2004a On reanalysis and actualization in syntactic change: The rise and development of English verbal gerunds. Diachronica21(1). 5–55. doi: 10.1075/dia.21.1.03fan
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.21.1.03fan [Google Scholar]
  22. 2004b Some strategies for coding sentential subjects in English: From exaptation to grammaticalization. Studies in Language28(2). 321–361. doi: 10.1075/sl.28.2.03fan
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.28.2.03fan [Google Scholar]
  23. 2006 The role of language standardization in the loss of hybrid gerunds in Modern English. In Leiv Egil Breivik , Sandra Halverson & Kari Haugland (eds.), ‘These things write I vnto thee...’: Essays in honour of Bjorg Bækken, 93–110. Oslo: Novus Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. 2007 Drift and the development of sentential complements in British and American English from 1700 to the present day. In Javier Pérez-Guerra , Dolores González-Álvarez , Jorge L. Bueno-Alonso & Esperanza Rama-Martínez (eds.), ‘Of varying language and opposing creed’: New insights into Late Modern English, 161–235. Bern: Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Fauconnier, Gilles
    1985Mental spaces: Aspects of meaning construction in natural language. Cambridge: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Fischer, Olga
    1992 Syntactic change and borrowing: The case of the accusative-and-infinitive construction in English. In Marinel Gerritsen & Dieter Stein (eds.), Internal and external factors in syntactic change, 17–89. Berlin: Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Fonteyn, Lauren , Hendrik De Smet & Liesbet Heyvaert
    2015a What it means to verbalize: The changing discourse functions of the English gerund. Journal of English Linguistics43(1). 36–60. doi: 10.1177/0075424214564365
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0075424214564365 [Google Scholar]
  28. Fonteyn, Lauren , Liesbet Heyvaert & Charlotte Maekelberghe
    2015b How do gerunds conceptualize events? A diachronic study. Cognitive Linguistics26(4). 583–612. doi: 10.1515/cog‑2015‑0061
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2015-0061 [Google Scholar]
  29. Givón, Talmy
    1990Syntax: A functional-typological introduction. Vol. II. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/z.50
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.50 [Google Scholar]
  30. Halliday, Michael A.K
    1985An introduction to functional grammar. London: Arnold.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Haspelmath, Martin
    1997Indefinite pronouns. Oxford: Clarendon.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Hawkins, John A
    1978Definiteness and indefiniteness: A study in reference and grammaticality prediction. London: Helm.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Heyvaert, Liesbet
    2008 On the constructional semantics of gerundive nominalizations. Folia Linguistica42(1). 39–82. doi: 10.1515/FLIN.2008.39
    https://doi.org/10.1515/FLIN.2008.39 [Google Scholar]
  34. Hopper, Paul J. & Sandra A. Thompson
    1985 The iconicity of the universal categories ‘noun’ and ‘verb’. In John Haiman (ed.), Iconicity in Syntax, 151–186. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.6.08hop
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.6.08hop [Google Scholar]
  35. Houston, Ann
    1989 The English gerund: Syntactic change and discourse function. In Ralph W. Fasold & Deborah Schiffrin (eds.), Language change and variation, 173–196. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/cilt.52.10hou
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.52.10hou [Google Scholar]
  36. Huddleston, Rodney & Geoffrey K. Pullum
    2002The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: CUP
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Jack, George B
    1988 The origins of the English gerund. Nowele12. 15–75. doi: 10.1075/nowele.12.02jac
    https://doi.org/10.1075/nowele.12.02jac [Google Scholar]
  38. Jespersen, Otto
    1940A Modern English grammar on historical principles. Vol. 5. London: Allen & Unwin.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Kranich, Svenja
    2006 The origin of English gerundial constructions: A case of French influence?. In Andrew J. Johnston , Ferdinand von Mengden & Stefan Thim (eds.), Language and text: Current perspectives on English and German historical linguistics and philology, 179–195. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Kroch, Anthony & Ann Taylor
    2000Penn-Helsinki parsed corpus of middle English, 2nd ed. www.ling.upenn.edu/hist-corpora/PPCME2-RELEASE-2/.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Kroch, Anthony , Beatrice Santorini & Lauren Delfs
    2004Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Early Modern English. www.ling.upenn.edu/hist-corpora/PPCEME-RELEASE-1/.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Kroch, Anthony , Beatrice Santorini & Ariel Diertani
    2010Penn Parsed Corpus of Modern British English. www.ling.upenn.edu/hist-corpora/PPCMBE-RELEASE-1/.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Langacker, Ronald W
    1991Foundations of cognitive grammar. Vol. 2. Stanford, CA.: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. 2009Investigations in cognitive grammar. Berlin: Mouton. doi: 10.1515/9783110214369
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214369 [Google Scholar]
  45. Lyons, John
    1999Definiteness. Cambridge: CUP. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511605789
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511605789 [Google Scholar]
  46. Maekelberghe, Charlotte & Liesbet Heyvaert
    . Forthcoming. Indefinite nominal gerunds, or the particularization of a reified event. English Studies.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Malchukov, Andrej L
    2004Nominalization, verbalization: Constraining a typology of transcategorial operations. Munich: Lincom Europa.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. 2006 Constraining nominalization: function/form competition. Linguistics44(5). 973–1009. doi: 10.1515/LING.2006.032
    https://doi.org/10.1515/LING.2006.032 [Google Scholar]
  49. Mari, Alda , Claire Beyssade & Fabio Del Prete
    2013Genericity. Oxford: OUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Martin, James Robert
    1992English Text: System and Structure. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/z.59
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.59 [Google Scholar]
  51. Miller, Gary D
    2002Nonfinite structures in theory and change. Oxford: OUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Mustanoja, Tauno Frans
    1960A Middle English syntax. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Postal, Paul Martin
    1970 On coreferential complement subject deletion. Linguistic Inquiry1(4). 439–500.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Prince, Ellen F
    1992 The ZPG letter subjects: Definiteness and information status. In Sandra Thompson & William Mann (eds.), Discourse description diverse analyses of a fundraising text, 295–325. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.16.12pri
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.16.12pri [Google Scholar]
  55. Quine, Willard V.O
    1960Word and object. Cambridge: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Quirk, Randolph S. , Sidney Greenbaum , Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik
    1985A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena
    1991 The noun phrase in early sixteenth-century English: A study based on Sir Thomas Moore’s writing. Mémoires de la Société Néophilologique de Helsinki 50. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Rissanen, Matti
    1999 Syntax. In Roger Lass (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language, Vol. III, Early Modern English 1476–1776, 187–331. Cambridge: CUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Schachter, Paul
    1976 A nontransformational account of gerundive nominals in English. Linguistic Inquiry7(2). 205–241.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Sommerer, Lotte
    2011Old English se from demonstrative to article: A usage-based study of nominal determination and category emergence. Vienna: University of Vienna PhD thesis.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. 2012 Investigating article development in Old English: About categorization, gradualness and constructions. Folia Linguistica Historica33. 175–213.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Tabor, Whitney & Elisabeth Closs Traugott
    1998 Structural scope expansion and grammaticalization. In Anna Giacolone Ramat & Paul John Hopper (eds.), The limits of grammaticalization, 229–272. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.37.11tab
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.37.11tab [Google Scholar]
  63. Tajima, Matsuji
    1999 The compound gerund in Early Modern English. In Sheila Embleton , John E. Joseph & Hans-Josef Niederehe (eds.), The emergence of the modern language sciences: Studies on the transition from historical-comparative to structural linguistics in honour of E. F. K. Koerner, 265–276. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/z.emls2.23taj
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.emls2.23taj [Google Scholar]
  64. Van de Velde, Freek
    2010 The emergence of the determiner in the Dutch NP. Linguistics48(2). 263–299. doi: 10.1515/ling.2010.009
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2010.009 [Google Scholar]
  65. Visser, Frederick Theodor
    1963–1973An historical syntax of the English language. Leiden: Brill.
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Von Heusinger, Klaus
    2002 Specificity and definiteness in sentence and discourse structure. Jounral of Semantics19. 245–274. doi: 10.1093/jos/19.3.245
    https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/19.3.245 [Google Scholar]
  67. Willemse, Peter
    2005Nominal reference-point constructions: Possessive and esphoric NPs in English. Leuven: University of Leuven PhD thesis.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Wurff, van der Wim
    1993 Gerunds and their objects in the Modern English period. In Jaap Van Marle (ed.), Historical linguistics 1991, 363–375. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/cilt.107.24wur
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.107.24wur [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/fol.23.1.04fon
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