Traditionally, verbs like base have combined with the preposition on to express a meaning of derivation (based on). However, many writing in a US context have noticed the rapid rise of based off (of) alongside based on (Curzan 2013; Behrens 2014; Janda 2021). In this article, we document the relative increase of off in two English-language corpora in the verb base and six other verbs. The results show a clear real-time trend of increasing use of off, with some differences in the course of the change across different verbs. We also see an increase in use of off in apparent time, which we infer from the topical organization of comments in one of our corpora, the social media site Reddit.

Linguistic creativity and productivity have become active topics of research, especially amongst scholars who employ insights from Construction Grammar (CxG) in their analyses. The question of how creativity should be defined and operationalized has in particular emerged as a major point of discussion and debate (e.g. Hoffmann 2018, 2024; Bergs 2018; Bergs & Kompa 2020), and the psychological, contextual and interactional factors that underlie creative language use have received a great deal of attention in recent work (e.g. Hoffmann 2018, 2020, 2024; Herbst 2018; Turner 2018; Hartmann & Ungerer 2023). These studies have substantially increased our understanding of linguistic creativity and productivity, but there are still many open questions about their mutual relationship as well as their connection to related phenomena, such as extravagance (Haspelmath 1999; Eitelmann & Haumann 2022; Trousdale & Norde 2025). In this special issue, the authors investigate a variety of questions related to creative language use and productivity, each providing new insights into the ongoing discussion of the nature of linguistic innovation in the context of English.

A perennial problem for sociolinguists interested in morphosyntactic variation is that such forms are often low frequency, making quantitative analysis difficult or impossible. However, sociolinguists have been generally reluctant to adopt methodologies from syntax, such as acceptability data gleaned from speaker intuition, due to the belief that these judgments are not necessarily reliable. In this article we present data from the Scots Syntax Atlas, which employs sociolinguistic methodologies in spoken data alongside the results of acceptability judgments. We target three morphosyntactic variables and compare and contrast these across the two data types in order to assess the reliability of the judgment data at community level. The results show that reliability is variable-dependent. For some variables, there is clear correlation; with others, it appears that, as Labov (1996) phrased it, ‘intuitions fail’. We discuss how factors such as salience, social stigma and local identity combine to govern the reliability of judgment data.

The article looks at instances of specialisation for specific linguistic contexts in ‘command’ and ‘inference’ uses of will and must. It tests the feasibility of different motivations for this specialisation, such as statistical and construal pre-emption. It also proposes a new motivation for specialisation, polysemous pre-emption, i.e. whether a strongly entrenched polyseme of a given expression might pre-empt the use of an expression with a less strongly entrenched polyseme. The investigation uses corpus analysis and distinctive collexeme analysis to test the three motivations (statistical, construal, and polysemous pre-emption). The results show that all instances of specialisation with will and must could be explained through construal pre-emption and/or polysemous pre-emption, thus making recourse to statistical pre-emption unnecessary.

Several of the world’s languages exhibit double determination structures, including English dialects which have a construction with a demonstrative determiner and a locative adverb (e.g. this here book). Doubling in demonstratives has commonly been explained as a language’s response to a loss of deixis, leading to a linguistic cycle. However, this explanation cannot be sustained for English because demonstratives are fully functioning grammatical deictics (e.g. this book). In this article, we probe the role of doubling in the history and grammatical development of English double demonstratives with evidence from rural UK dialects. Using quantitative methods and the principle of accountability we calculate proportion of forms and patterning in simple and double demonstratives, enabling us to demonstrate that the doubled form has particular discourse-pragmatic functions, most notably, to flag topics in discourse. Our findings lead us to make two theoretical proposals. First, double demonstratives in English are used for discourse-pragmatic purposes; and second, doubling led to a new, complex determiner suitable to take over discourse-pragmatic functions from simple determiners (complexification of the determiner paradigm). Finally, we suggest that obsolescing features like the English double demonstrative offer key insights for understanding the development of linguistic systems.

Recent research shows that, even under direct insertion, loan verbs are subject to constraints: for instance, they enter non-finite categories more readily than finite categories. To deepen our understanding of such loan word accommodation biases we investigate two contact situations to test whether biases hold in contact between closely related languages. A corpus study on Norse and French loan verbs entering Middle English compares the proportions of their finite and non-finite usage to gauge the impact of etymology and temporal distance to direct contact on loan integration. We identify significant bias towards non-finite use for both etymologies, but it is stronger for French than for Norse loan verbs. This suggests that biases are stronger in some contexts than in others: they are more prominent at a smaller temporal distance to direct contact and in contact between languages that are less closely related.

In this article, we consider the relationship between conceptual blending, creativity and morphological change, within the framework of Diachronic Construction Morphology (DCxM; Norde & Trousdale 2023). In particular, we suggest that a refinement to models of creativity in the literature might help to account better for different types of morphological change (Norde & Trousdale 2024). This is achieved via a contrastive analysis of two different sets of changes: (a) the creation of English libfixes (Zwicky 2010; Norde & Sippach 2019), e.g. snowmaggedon and spooktacular, and (b) the development of Dutch pseudoparticiples (Norde & Trousdale 2024), e.g. bebrild ‘bespectacled’ and ontstekkerd ‘with all plugs removed’.

While the category shift of deverbal prepositions has been well documented in grammaticalization studies, its accompanying process of subjectification remains underexplored. Adopting a constructionist perspective, this article addresses the gap by analyzing data from the Corpus of Historical American English. We present a multivariate analysis of the deverbal preposition considering to examine the role that subjectification has played along the way to it becoming a preposition over the past 200 years. Specifically, we investigate whether the two grammatical variants, participial and prepositional considering, can be anchored in context, focusing on a set of subjectivity indicators and their gradual changes over time. The findings are twofold. First, the two variants can be distinguished by six contextual features, namely subject animacy, subject person, contextual polarity, presence of degree modifiers, presence of modal auxiliaries and genre. Second, over time, there is an increasing correlation between the prepositional variant and levels within contextual features that indicate greater evaluative subjectivity. Previous scholarship has debated whether subjectification is independent of grammaticalization. This study contributes to this discourse by illustrating how various facets of subjectification may interact and manifest to varying degrees within the process of grammatical change.

Modal concord refers to the phenomenon where the co-occurrence of two modal elements with the same flavor and force (e.g. may possibly, must certainly) gives rise to the interpretation of single modality. Given their (arguably) equivalent semantics, constructions with modal concord and single modal (e.g. may, must) can function as alternative choices in different contexts of use – how do speakers choose between them, and how is the choice perceived? In this article, we take a ‘Register’ approach and report an experimental study of MC in US English, addressing their linguistic and social meanings with versus without situational context. The results show that (i) modal concord constructions differ from single modal ones in linguistic meanings, which casts doubt on the concord assumption, and (ii) modal concord has distinct social meanings from those of single modal constructions. Our findings suggest a correlation between the meaning strength of a linguistic expression and the social perception about the speaker. Context, manipulated via the single situational parameter of interlocutor relation (close vs. distant), did not interact with the linguistic or social meaning of modal concord constructions, the implications of which are discussed in relation to the multidimensional nature of conversational situations and the method applied.

This article is a theoretically oriented discussion of noticeable creative syntactic innovations. On the basis of three case studies (the ‘X-much’ construction (racist much?), the ‘extrasentential not’ construction (I like this movie. Not.) and the ‘because X’ construction (Can’t come to the party, because headache.)), we explore the idea that language users may deliberately create novel syntactic constructions by recycling and creatively blending existing constructions. At least two of the constructions discussed here (X much and extrasentential not) are probably not products of informal, natural daily language use, but may have originated (or at least have been propagated) in well-crafted, scripted media language geared towards younger audiences, who in turn have spread these constructions in their communities and beyond. Because X seems to have taken a slightly different route. The main motivations for these three rather noticeable creative innovations may be the Maxim of Extravagance and the Maxim of Wittiness, in Keller’s (1994) sense. We suspect that because X is perhaps less noticeable, or deviant, and pragmatically more complex than the other two constructions, which provides their speakers with more ‘syntactic fireworks’.

One of the questions that still surrounds the history of auxiliary do is what function it had during the Middle English period (c.1100–1500). Scholars have put forward different hypotheses, suggesting that it could serve, among others, as a perfective marker (Denison 1985), agentive marker (Ecay 2015) and habitual marker (Garrett 1998). The present article reports on a quantitative study that aims to shed further light on this issue. By means of a collexeme analysis, this article investigates the semantic features of the infinitives that occur with auxiliary do in several Middle English corpora. The results show that auxiliary do was not connected to verbs with specific semantic profiles, but it was employed in different contexts and had various functions. Specifically, the data suggest that auxiliary do was used (i) as an accommodation tool to facilitate the use of low-frequency verbs, particularly of French origin, and (ii) as an aspectual particle to mark both perfectivity and habituality. It is argued that the multifunctionality of auxiliary do in Middle English played a crucial role in the preservation of the construction before it spread to the NICE (i.e. negation, inversion, code and emphasis) environments.

English morphosyntactic agreement, such as determiner–noun agreement in These cabs broke down and noun–verb agreement in The cabs break down, has a few interesting properties that enable us to investigate whether agreement has a psycholinguistic function, that is, whether it helps the listener process linguistic information expressed by a speaker. The present project relies on these properties in a perception experiment, examines the two aforementioned types of English agreement, and aims at analyzing whether and how native English listeners benefit from agreement. The two types of agreement were contrasted with cases without any overtly agreeing elements (e.g. The cabs broke down). Native speakers of English with normal hearing heard short English sentences in quiet and in more or less intense white noise and were requested to indicate whether the second word of the sentence (e.g. These cabs broke down) was a singular or plural noun. Accuracy was entered as the response variable in the binomial logistic regression model. Results showed that overt determiner–noun agreement clearly increased response accuracy, while noun–verb agreement had at best marginal effects. The findings are interpreted against the background of functional aspects of linguistic structures in English, in the context of unfavorable listening conditions in particular.

Several studies have been devoted, partly or wholly, to the different uses of the adverb actually. Although there is considerable agreement on the main discourse functions actually can perform, there is little consensus on which subtypes to distinguish, and how these subtypes, and the functions they perform, are related to the formal properties of actually. Consequently, conclusions concerning the relation between the various functions of actually and its position and prosodic realization are often contradictory, and the overall picture is still incomplete. On the basis of data from the International Corpus of English – Great Britain, this article presents the results of a systematic (qualitative and quantitative) investigation into the function, position and prosody of actually, and the way in which these factors interact. It is demonstrated that (i) by classifying the many functions of actually identified in previous studies into three major types (propositional, discourse-pragmatic and discourse-organizational) and (ii) by appealing to additional functional factors, such as scope, strength and orientation, to distinguish a limited number of subtypes, it is possible to detect strong correlations between the functions of actually and its formal (positional and prosodic) features.

The English modals have been used as case studies in many domains of linguistic enquiry. Their diachronic development and patterns of synchronic variation in historical and contemporary corpora have been used to develop theories of linguistic representation, to further understanding of correlations between structure and use, and to investigate relationships between form and meaning. However, much of this research explores only the modals themselves: relatively little attention has been given to the study of modal collocations. In this article, we explore variation and change in collocational patterns of two modals (may and might) when they appear directly adjacent to the adverb well. Our analysis is corpus based, using quantitative data to explore macro-level trends in recent American English, and qualitative analysis to explore micro-level variation, particularly with regard to the development of concessive uses of may and might, and post-modal meanings more generally. We foreground the idea that modals show subtly different diachronic trends in specific collocations compared to perceived trends when looked at as an isolated class of auxiliary verbs.

This article examines the notions of productivity and creativity with respect to complex verbs in English. Verb-forming suffixation involves the attachment of the suffixes ‑ize, ‑ify, -en and -ate to a base to form complex verbs such as hospitalize, densify, sharpen and hyphenate. Sampson (2016) describes productive processes that conform to existing patterns as F-creativity, or Fixed-creativity, and those that deviate from those patterns as E-creativity, or Enlarging/Extending creativity; Bergs (2018) and Uhrig (2018) view the F–E dichotomy as a cline. Coercion effects can account for linguistic productivity and creativity; Audring & Booij (2016) propose that the coercive mechanisms of Selection, Enrichment and Override lie on a unified continuum. This article integrates the F–E creativity and coercion continua, and analyses a database of conventionalized and recently coined complex verbs (Laws 2023) for instances of coercion. The results reveal that coercive mechanisms, particularly Selection and Enrichment, facilitate productivity and creativity in more complex constructional schemas underlying verbal derivatives, and that these coercive patterns have become increasingly more entrenched over time. E-creativity of complex verbs is defined here as ‘Unruly’ coercion and the nature of attested examples is discussed.

This article examines the diachronic development of hedged performatives (HP) in spoken American English. HPs (e.g. I have to say, I must admit) combine a (semi-)modal verb and a performative verb, and were first analyzed by Fraser (1975). While subsequent research has investigated their discursive functions and established them as ‘constructions’, their diachronic development has not been analyzed within a Construction Grammar perspective. This article addresses this gap using three corpora: the TV Corpus, Movie Corpus and spoken COCA. We investigate fifteen HPs formed with three modals (have to, must, can), first sketching a constructional network with a macro-level ([I + MODAL + Vperf]), modal-specific meso-level (e.g. [I must Vperf]) and micro-level (e.g. [I must say]). Results show different diachronic trends at the meso-level: [I must Vperf] declines, [I have to Vperf] increases, and [I can Vperf] remains stable. These trends diverge from those of the base modals, confirming their constructional status. For must and have to HPs, change operates primarily at the meso-level, driven by evolving discourse norms. At the micro-level, must/have to HPs follow the meso-level trend, while can HPs show more variation. Finally, HPs are overrepresented in scripted speech, although diachronic trends remain consistent across registers.

Approaches to creativity commonly distinguish between F-creativity (rule-compliant use) and E-creativity (rule-breaking use). This dichotomy in part stems from a focus on grammatical constructions (‘nodes’) at the relative expense of their connections (‘links’). We approach creativity and productivity from a link-based perspective in Usage-Based Construction Grammar, and assume that productivity pertains to a unit’s inventory of links, while creativity pertains to the creation and maintenance of links. These assumptions are showcased using the into-causative (He talked me into going, They scared us into working harder). The construction is productive because it hosts a large inventory of verbal slot-fillers (talk, scare). Conversely, these slot-fillers themselves are creative because they can establish and maintain links with a construction that is not their primary host. This property is not linear: we assume that the slot-fillers’ ability to occur in unusual constructional environments reflects their general ‘creative potential’ to form and maintain (new) links within the network. In data from the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA), we find weak, but consistent correlations between verbs’ association with the into-causative and (i) their semantic and syntactic compatibility with the construction, and, crucially, (ii) their general flexibility and ability to establish and maintain links.

Comparative speech-act studies have found that British English directives tend to include the pragmatic marker please at about twice the rate of American English directives. Nevertheless, lexical please is often as frequent in American English corpora as in British ones – indicating that sincere directives are only part of this pragmatic marker’s story. This article reports on British and American please usage in the Corpus of Global Web-based English (GloWbE; Davies 2013). GloWbE shows similar numbers of non-verbal please on American and British websites, but also differences in what please is used for. This contributes to a larger picture of pragmatic variation in which British English uses a more bleached and routine please, whereas American please might be more at home effecting im/politeness in contexts of greater face-threat.

We investigate a class of adjective phrases composed of a deadjectival adverb ending in -ly and an adjective head (e.g. staggeringly incompetent, absolutely terrific, fiscally responsible), a compact construction whereby two adjectives may jointly contribute to evaluative meaning. Using corpus methodologies on more than 1 million examples and relying on semantic analyses of about 1,000 instances, we propose that the construction can be divided into different semantic subtypes, including Degree (deeply disturbing), Focus (utterly ridiculous), Manner (delightfully performed), Reaction (strangely compelling), Topical (historically inaccurate) and Epistemic (intuitively obvious), among others. Using this typology, we investigate the relative distribution of each subtype across several registers of written English. We found a high frequency of the Reaction subtype in book, film and art reviews, and we suggest a discourse-functional explanation for this, linked to the perceived value of originality in expressive writing. This investigation reveals the power of semantically informed, corpus methodologies to shed light on the distribution of specific constructions.