1887
Volume 31, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0929-0907
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9943

Abstract

Abstract

In this paper, I investigate the functional dimension of non-finite causal constructions, exemplified using the English X constructions. The analysis identifies two functions of these constructions: expressing causality and commenting. Primarily, non-finite causal constructions express cause or reason. Secondarily, however, speakers can also use these constructions to offer a comment about the expressed cause or reason. These two functions represent two poles on a functional continuum. While some non-finite causal constructions only express causal meaning and some serve predominantly as comments, they usually combine both functions.

Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/pc.24011.kon
2025-01-17
2025-02-15
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/pc.24011.kon.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/pc.24011.kon&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Austin, John L.
    1975How to do things with words (2nd edn.). Edited byJames O. Urmson & Marina Sbisà. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198245537.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198245537.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  2. Bailey, Laura
    2012 Because reasons. linguistlaura. https://linguistlaura.blogspot.com/2012/07/because-reasons.html. (16 August, 2022).
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bell, Allan
    1984 Language style as audience design. Language in Society (13). 145–204. 10.1017/S004740450001037X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S004740450001037X [Google Scholar]
  4. Bergs, Alexander
    2018 Because science! Notes on a variable conjunction. InElena Seoane, Carlos Acuña-Fariña & Ignacio Palacios-Martínez (eds.), Subordination in English, 43–60. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110583571‑003
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110583571-003 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bisang, Walter
    2014 Overt and hidden complexity: Two types of complexity and their implications. Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics50(2). 127–143. 10.1515/psicl‑2014‑0009
    https://doi.org/10.1515/psicl-2014-0009 [Google Scholar]
  6. 2015 Hidden complexity: The neglected side of complexity and its implications. Linguistics Vanguard1(1). 177–187. 10.1515/lingvan‑2014‑1014
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2014-1014 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bohmann, Axel
    2016 Language change because Twitter? Factors motivating innovative uses of because across the English-speaking Twittersphere. InLauren Squires (ed.), English in computer-mediated communication. Variation, representation, and change, 149–178. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110490817‑008
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110490817-008 [Google Scholar]
  8. 2020 Situating Twitter discourse in relation to spoken and written texts: A lectometric analysis. Eine lektometrische Analyse. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik87(2). 250–284. 10.25162/zdl‑2020‑0009
    https://doi.org/10.25162/zdl-2020-0009 [Google Scholar]
  9. Brinton, Laurel J.
    2008The comment clause in English: Syntactic origins and pragmatic development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511551789
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511551789 [Google Scholar]
  10. Bruns, Axel & Hallvard Moe
    2014 Structural layers of communication on Twitter. InKatrin Weller, Axel Bruns, Jean Burgess, Merja Mahrt & Cornelius Puschmann (eds.), Twitter and society, 15–28. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Burger, Harald & Martin Luginbühl
    2014 Mündlichkeit und Schriftlichkeit. InMediensprache. Eine Einführung in Sprache und Kommunikationsformen der Massenmedien (4th edn.), 173–200. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110285925.173
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110285925.173 [Google Scholar]
  12. Declerck, Renaat & Susan Reed
    2001Conditionals: A comprehensive empirical analysis. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110851748
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110851748 [Google Scholar]
  13. Du Bois, John W.
    2007 The stance triangle. InRobert Englebretson (ed.), Stancetaking in discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction, 139–182. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.164.07du
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.164.07du [Google Scholar]
  14. Eisenstein, Jacob
    2015 Systematic patterning in phonologically-motivated orthographic variation. Journal of Sociolinguistics19(2). 161–188. 10.1111/josl.12119
    https://doi.org/10.1111/josl.12119 [Google Scholar]
  15. Fitzmaurice, Susan
    2004 Subjectivity, intersubjectivity and the historical construction of interlocutor stance: From stance markers to discourse markers. Discourse Studies6(4). 427–448. 10.1177/1461445604046585
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445604046585 [Google Scholar]
  16. Garber, Megan
    2013 English has a new preposition, because Internet. The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/11/english-has-a-new-preposition-because-internet/281601/. (16 August, 2022).
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Grice, H. Paul.
    1975 Logic and conversation. InPeter Cole & Jerry L. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and semantics (vol. 3: Speech acts), 41–58. New York: Academic Press. 10.1163/9789004368811_003
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368811_003 [Google Scholar]
  18. Johnson, Casey Rebecca
    2023 Some varieties of illocutionary pluralism. InLaura Caponetto & Paolo Labinaz (eds.), Sbisà on speech as action, 121–141. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1007/978‑3‑031‑22528‑4_6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-22528-4_6 [Google Scholar]
  19. Kaltenböck, Gunther, Bernd Heine & Tania Kuteva
    2011 On thetical grammar. Studies in Language35(4). 852–897. 10.1075/sl.35.4.03kal
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.35.4.03kal [Google Scholar]
  20. Kanetani, Masaru
    2015 On the new usage of because. Studies in Language and Literature681. 63–79.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. 2019Causation and reasoning constructions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.25
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.25 [Google Scholar]
  22. Koch, Peter & Wulf Oesterreicher
    1985 Sprache der Nähe — Sprache der Distanz. Mündlichkeit und Schriftlichkeit im Spannungsfeld von Sprachtheorie und Sprachgeschichte. InOlaf Deutschmann, Hans Flasche, Bernhard König, Margot Kruse, Walter Pabst & Wolf-Dieter Stempel (eds.), Romanistisches Jahrbuch, 15–43. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110244922.15
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110244922.15 [Google Scholar]
  23. Konvička, Martin
    2019 De verborgen complexiteit van want/omdat X. Internationale Neerlandistiek57(2). 161–183. 10.5117/IN2019.2.004.KONV
    https://doi.org/10.5117/IN2019.2.004.KONV [Google Scholar]
  24. 2023 Category membership and category potential: The case of vague because. Lexis. Journal in English lexicology (22). 10.4000/lexis.7418
    https://doi.org/10.4000/lexis.7418 [Google Scholar]
  25. 2024Because reasons. Non-finite causal constructions in English, German, Dutch, and Czech. Berlin: Freie Universität Berlin PhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Konvička, Martin & Kristin Stöcker
    2020 Because X in Dutch, English, and German. Corpus. GitHub. https://github.com/kwossi/becauseX. (18 February, 2022).
    [Google Scholar]
  27. 2022 (Non-)ellipses in Dutch, English, and German: The case of because X. Nederlandse Taalkunde27(3). 333–367. 10.5117/NEDTAA2022.3.003.KONV
    https://doi.org/10.5117/NEDTAA2022.3.003.KONV [Google Scholar]
  28. Landert, Daniela & Andreas H. Jucker
    2011 Private and public in mass media communication: From letters to the editor to online commentaries. Journal of Pragmatics43(5). 1422–1434. 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.10.016
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.10.016 [Google Scholar]
  29. Maat, Henk Pander & Ted Sanders
    1995 Nederlandse causale connectieven en het onderscheid tussen inhoudelijke en epistemische coherentie-relaties. Leuvense Bijdragen. Leuven Contribution in Linguistics and Philology841. 349–374.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. 2000 Domains of use or subjectivity? The distribution of three Dutch causal connectives explained. InElizabeth Couper-Kuhlen & Bernd Kortmann (eds.), Cause, condition, concession, contrast, 57–82. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110219043.1.57
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219043.1.57 [Google Scholar]
  31. Marwick, Alice E. & danah boyd
    2011 I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media & Society13(1). 114–133. 10.1177/1461444810365313
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810365313 [Google Scholar]
  32. McCulloch, Gretchen
    2014 Where “because noun” probably came from. All things linguistic. allthingslinguistic.com/post/67507311833/where-because-noun-probably-came-from. (16 August, 2022).
    [Google Scholar]
  33. McGregor, William B.
    2013 There are existential constructions and existential constructions: Presumption-invoking existentials in English. Folia Linguistica47(1). 139–181. 10.1515/flin.2013.007
    https://doi.org/10.1515/flin.2013.007 [Google Scholar]
  34. Okada, Sadayuki
    2021 Category-free complement selection in causal adjunct phrases. English Language and Linguistics25(4). 719–741. 10.1017/S1360674320000295
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674320000295 [Google Scholar]
  35. Pit, Mirna, Henk Pander Maat & Ted Sanders
    1997 ‘Doordat’, ‘omdat’ en ‘want’. Perspectieven op hun gebruik. Taalbeheersing19(3). 238–251.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Posner, Roland
    1972Theorie des Kommentierens: Eine Grundlagenstudie zur Semantik und Pragmatik. Frankfurt am Main: Athenäum.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik
    (eds.) 1985A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Rehn, Anneliise
    2015 Because meaning: Language change through iconicity in internet speak. BA thesis. Berkeley, CA: University of California.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Romano, Aja
    2013 We’re all using language differently now, because Internet culture. Daily Dot. https://www.dailydot.com/irl/because-preposition-language-internet/. (17 August, 2022).
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Schneider-Mizony, Odile
    2021 Kommentar als Anschlusskommunikation, Informationserweiterung, oder didaktische Intention?InAnne-Françoise Ehrhard-Macris & Gilbert Magnus (eds.), Text und Kommentieren im Deutschen, 17–30. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Schnoebelen, Tyler
    2014 Innovating because innovation. Corpus Linguistics. https://corp​linguistics.word​press.com/2014/01/15/innovating​-because​-innovation/. (22 February, 2022).
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Sommerer, Lotte
    2023 If that’s what she said, then that’s what she said: A usage-based, constructional analysis of pleonastic conditionals in English. Corpus Pragmatics7. 345–376. 10.1007/s41701‑023‑00148‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s41701-023-00148-9 [Google Scholar]
  43. Stalnaker, Robert
    2002 Common ground. Linguistics and Philosophy251. 701–721. 10.1023/A:1020867916902
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020867916902 [Google Scholar]
  44. Sweetser, Eve E.
    1990From etymology to pragmatics. Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511620904
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620904 [Google Scholar]
  45. Traugott, Elisabeth Closs
    2003 From subjectification to intersubjectification. InRaymond Hickey (ed.), Motives for language change, 124–139. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511486937.009
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486937.009 [Google Scholar]
  46. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
    2010 (Inter)subjectivity and (inter)subjectification: A reassessment. InKristin Davidse, Lieven Vandelanotte & Hubert Cuyckens (eds.), Subjectification, intersubjectification and grammaticalization, 29–74. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110226102.1.29
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110226102.1.29 [Google Scholar]
  47. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Richard B. Dasher
    2002Regularity in semantic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Verhagen, Arie
    2005Constructions of intersubjectivity: Discourse, syntax, and cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Verstraete, Jean-Christophe
    2007Rethinking the coordinate-subordinate dichotomy: Interpersonal grammar and the analysis of adverbial clauses in English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110918199
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110918199 [Google Scholar]
  50. Whitman, Neal
    2013 Because as a preposition. Quick and Dirty Tips. https://www.quick​and​dirty​tips.com/articles/because-as-a-preposition/. (16 August, 2022).
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/pc.24011.kon
Loading
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