1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Functions of Language
  4. Online First Articles
  5. Online First Article
image of I’m all virtual-peopled out
EPUB
PDF

Abstract

Abstract

This paper assesses the recent development of a particular constructional template, viz. the ‘exhaustive’ construction in English. This pattern combines a form of [ X-] with a meaning of ‘being exhausted from excessive experiences with X’, where the X-slot is proposedly almost unlimited in its productivity, as any lexical item and word class can be coerced into it. The paper uses data from the NOW-corpus, covering the time-span of 2010-2022 (Davies 2016–), to (a) zoom in on the origins of this constructional idiom, (b) investigate its recent history as an instance of on-going change, both in terms of token frequency and of type frequency/productivity, and (c) assess the interaction of creativity, coercion, productivity, and schematicity in this development. The results indicate that the ‘exhaustive’ likely constitutes an extension of expressions of tiredness (as in ), but counter to expectations, seems to have been decreasing in productivity in recent years. This may be linked to its persisting status as a creative, deliberate ad-hoc deviation from conventions rather than a conventionalising innovation.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/fol.23015.zeh
2025-05-12
2025-06-24

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/fol.23015.zeh
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/10.1075/fol.23015.zeh/fol.23015.zeh.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/fol.23015.zeh&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Audring, Jenny & Geert Booij
    2016 Cooperation and coercion. Linguistics (). –. 10.1515/ling‑2016‑0012
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2016-0012 [Google Scholar]
  2. Auguie, Baptiste
    2017 gridExtra: Miscellaneous functions for ‘grid’ graphics. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/gridExtra/index.html
  3. Baayen, Harald
    1992 Quantitative aspects of morphological productivity. InGert E. Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1991, –. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 10.1007/978‑94‑011‑2516‑1_8
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-2516-1_8 [Google Scholar]
  4. 2009 Corpus linguistics in morphology: Morphological productivity. InAnke Lüdeling & Merja Kytö (eds.), Corpus linguistics. An international handbook, Vol. 2, –. Berlin: Mouton. 10.1515/9783110213881.2.899
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110213881.2.899 [Google Scholar]
  5. Baayen, Harald & Rochelle Lieber
    1991 Productivity and English derivation: A corpus-based study. Linguistics. –. 10.1515/ling.1991.29.5.801
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1991.29.5.801 [Google Scholar]
  6. Barðdal, Jóhanna
    2008 Productivity: Evidence from case and argument structure in Icelandic. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.8
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.8 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bergs, Alexander
    2018 Learn the rules like a pro, so you can break them like an artist (Picasso): Linguistic aberrancy from a constructional perspective. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik(). –. 10.1515/zaa‑2018‑0025
     https://doi.org/10.1515/zaa-2018-0025 [Google Scholar]
  8. 2019 What, if anything, is linguistic creativity?Gestalt Theory(). –. 10.2478/gth‑2019‑0017
     https://doi.org/10.2478/gth-2019-0017 [Google Scholar]
  9. 2020 Learning formulaic creativity: Chunking in verbal art and speech — a response to Cristóbal Pagán Cánovas. Cognitive Semiotics(). . 10.1515/cogsem‑2020‑2024
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cogsem-2020-2024 [Google Scholar]
  10. Bergs, Alexander & Nikola A. Kompa
    2020 Creativity within and outside the linguistic system. Cognitive Semiotics(). . 10.1515/cogsem‑2020‑2025
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cogsem-2020-2025 [Google Scholar]
  11. Busso, Lucia, Florent Perek & Alessandro Lenci
    2021 Constructional associations trump lexical associations in processing valency coercion. Cognitive Linguistics(). –. 10.1515/cog‑2020‑0050
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2020-0050 [Google Scholar]
  12. Chang, Charles
    2004 All syntaxed out: The exhaustive verb-particle construction in English. https://cbchang.com/wp-content/uploads/Chang_ms_allsyntaxedout.pdf (access date: 13/01/2025).
  13. Davies, Mark
    2016– Corpus of News on the Web (NOW). https://www.english-corpora.org/now/
  14. 2017 The new 4.3 billion word NOW corpus, with 45 million words of data added every day. Presentation atThe 9th International Corpus Linguistics Conference 2017. www.birmingham.ac.uk/Documents/college-artslaw/corpus/conferencearchives/2017/general/paper250.pdf
  15. Goldberg, Adele
    1995 Constructions: A Construction Grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. 2016 Tuning in to the Verb-Particle Construction in English. InLéa Nash & Pollet Samvelian (eds.), Approaches to complex predicates, –. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789004307094_006
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004307094_006 [Google Scholar]
  17. Greenacre, Michael
    2017 Correspondence analysis in practice. 3rd edn.Boca Raton: Chapman and Hall. 10.1201/9781315369983
     https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315369983 [Google Scholar]
  18. Hartmann, Stefan & Tobias Ungerer
    2023 Attack of the snowclones: A corpus-based analysis of extravagant formulaic patterns. Journal of Linguistics(). –. 10.1017/S0022226723000117
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226723000117 [Google Scholar]
  19. Haspelmath, Martin
    1999 Why is grammaticalization irreversible?Linguistics(). –. 10.1515/ling.37.6.1043
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.37.6.1043 [Google Scholar]
  20. Herbst, Thomas
    2018 Collo-creativity and blending: Recognizing creativity requires lexical storage in constructional slots. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik(). –. 10.1515/zaa‑2018‑0027
     https://doi.org/10.1515/zaa-2018-0027 [Google Scholar]
  21. 2020 Blending is creative, but blendedness is not — a response to Mark Turner. Cognitive Semiotics(). . 10.1515/cogsem‑2020‑2020
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cogsem-2020-2020 [Google Scholar]
  22. Hilpert, Martin
    2012 Diachronic collostructional analysis. How to use it, and how to deal with confounding factors. InKathryn Allan & Justyna Robynson (eds.), Current methods in historical semantics, –. Berlin: Mouton. 10.1515/9783110252903.133
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110252903.133 [Google Scholar]
  23. Hoffmann, Thomas
    2018 Creativity and Construction Grammar: Cognitive and psychological issues. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik(). –. 10.1515/zaa‑2018‑0024
     https://doi.org/10.1515/zaa-2018-0024 [Google Scholar]
  24. 2019 Language and creativity: a Construction Grammar approach to linguistic creativity. Linguistics Vanguard(). . 10.1515/lingvan‑2019‑0019
     https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2019-0019 [Google Scholar]
  25. 2020 Speakers are creative, within limits — a response to Peter Uhrig. Cognitive Semiotics(). . 10.1515/cogsem‑2020‑2028
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cogsem-2020-2028 [Google Scholar]
  26. Hugou, Vincent
    2013 The Xed out construction: Between productivity and creativity. Quaderns de Filologia. Estudis lingüístics. –.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Husson, Francois, Sebastien Lê & Jérôme Pagès
    2017 Exploratory Multivariate Analysis by example using R. 2nd edn.London: Routledge. factominer.free.fr/book/. 10.1201/b21874
     https://doi.org/10.1201/b21874 [Google Scholar]
  28. Jackendoff, Ray
    2002 English particle constructions, the lexicon, and the autonomy of syntax. InNicole Dehé, Ray Jackendoff, Andrew McIntyre & Silke Urban (eds.), Verb-particle explorations, –. Berlin: Mouton. 10.1515/9783110902341.67
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110902341.67 [Google Scholar]
  29. 2010 Meaning and the lexicon: The parallel architecture, 1975–2010. Oxford: OUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. 2013 Constructions in the parallel architecture. InThomas Hoffmann & Graeme Trousdale (eds.), The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar, –. Oxford: OUP. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.013.0005
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.013.0005 [Google Scholar]
  31. Kassambara, Alboukadel & Fabian Mundt
    2020 factoextra: Extract and visualize the results of multivariate data analyses. R package. https://rpkgs.datanovia.com/factoextra/index.html
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Lauwers, Peter & Dominque Willems
    2011 Coercion: Definition and challenges, current approaches, and new trends. Linguistics(). –. 10.1515/ling.2011.034
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2011.034 [Google Scholar]
  33. Lê, Sebastien, Julie Josse & Francois Husson
    2008 FactoMineR: A package for multivariate analysis. Journal of Statistical Software(). –. 10.18637/jss.v025.i01
     https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v025.i01 [Google Scholar]
  34. Levshina, Natalia
    2015 How to do linguistics with R: Data exploration and statistical analysis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/z.195
     https://doi.org/10.1075/z.195 [Google Scholar]
  35. Nenadic, Oleg & Michael Greenacre
    2007 Correspondence analysis in R, with two- and three-dimensional graphics: The ca package. Journal of Statistical Software(). –. 10.18637/jss.v020.i03
     https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v020.i03 [Google Scholar]
  36. Perek, Florent
    2016 Using distributional semantics to study syntactic productivity in diachrony: A case study. Linguistics(). –. 10.1515/ling‑2015‑0043
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2015-0043 [Google Scholar]
  37. 2018 Recent change in the productivity and schematicity of the way-construction: A distributional semantic analysis. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory(). –. 10.1515/cllt‑2016‑0014
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2016-0014 [Google Scholar]
  38. 2020 Productivity and schematicity in constructional change. InLotte Sommerer & Elena Smirnova (eds.), Nodes and networks in Diachronic Construction Grammar, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.27.04per
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.27.04per [Google Scholar]
  39. Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik
    1985 A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London/New York: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. R Core Team
    R Core Team 2021 R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. www.R-project.org
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Renouf, Antoinette
    2007 Tracing lexical productivity and creativity in the British media: The Chavs and the Chav-Nots. InJudith Munat (ed.), Lexical creativity, texts and contexts, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sfsl.58.12ren
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sfsl.58.12ren [Google Scholar]
  42. Sampson, Geoffrey
    2016 Two ideas of creativity. InMartin Hinton (ed.), Evidence, experiment and argument in linguistics and philosophy of language, –. Bern: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Schmid, Hans-Jörg & Franziska Günther
    2016 Toward a unified socio-cognitive framework for salience in language. Frontiers in Psychology. . 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01110
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01110 [Google Scholar]
  44. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Graeme Trousdale
    2013 Constructionalization and constructional change. Oxford: OUP. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  45. Uhrig, Peter
    2018 I don’t want to go all yoko ono on you — creativity and variation in a family of constructions. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik(). –. 10.1515/zaa‑2018‑0026
     https://doi.org/10.1515/zaa-2018-0026 [Google Scholar]
  46. 2020 Creative intentions — the fine line between ‘creative’ and ‘wrong’. Cognitive Semiotics(). . 10.1515/cogsem‑2020‑2027
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cogsem-2020-2027 [Google Scholar]
  47. Ungerer, Tobias
    2023 Structural priming in the grammatical network. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.35
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.35 [Google Scholar]
  48. Wickham, Harley
    2016 ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis. New York: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑24277‑4
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24277-4 [Google Scholar]
  49. Wickham, Hadley & Romain Francois
    2015 dplyr: A grammar of data manipulation. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/dplyr/index.html
  50. Zeldes, Amir
    2013 Productivity in argument selection: From morphology to syntax. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110303919
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110303919 [Google Scholar]
  51. Ziegeler, Debra
    2007 A word of caution on coercion. Journal of Pragmatics(). –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2006.07.014
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.07.014 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/fol.23015.zeh
Loading
I’m all virtual-peopled out
John Benjamins ; https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.23015.zeh
/content/journals/10.1075/fol.23015.zeh
/content/journals/10.1075/fol.23015.zeh
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: English ; productivity ; verb-particle construction ; creativity ; exhaustives ; coercion ; schematicity

Most Cited

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