Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-zzh7m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T15:14:25.110Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Deictification: the development of secondary deictic meanings by adjectives in the English NP1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 November 2008

KRISTIN DAVIDSE ,
TINE BREBAN  and
AN VAN LINDEN
KRISTIN DAVIDSE
Affiliation:
Linguistics Department, KULeuven, Blijde-Inkomststraat 21, B-3000 Leuven, Belgiumkristin.davidse@arts.kuleuven.be, tine.breban@arts.kuleuven.be, an.vanlinden@arts.kuleuven.be
TINE BREBAN
Affiliation:
Linguistics Department, KULeuven, Blijde-Inkomststraat 21, B-3000 Leuven, Belgiumkristin.davidse@arts.kuleuven.be, tine.breban@arts.kuleuven.be, an.vanlinden@arts.kuleuven.be
AN VAN LINDEN
Affiliation:
Linguistics Department, KULeuven, Blijde-Inkomststraat 21, B-3000 Leuven, Belgiumkristin.davidse@arts.kuleuven.be, tine.breban@arts.kuleuven.be, an.vanlinden@arts.kuleuven.be
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this article we make a case for recognizing deictification as a type of grammaticalization and semantic shift in the NP analogous to auxiliarization in the VP. The specific analogy we point out is between lexical verbs that grammaticalize into secondary auxiliaries bound by the finite, as in is going to, has to + verb, and lexically full adjectives that grammaticalize into postdeterminers bound by the primary determiner, as in a different, the same + noun. We present five case studies of the development of postdeterminer meanings, based on the analysis of diachronic and synchronic data. The adjectives studied are opposite, complete, old, regular and necessary, whose postdeterminer uses relate to the basic deictic systems of space, quantity, time and modality. Our analysis of the data shows that the mechanism of secondary deictification can be given a unified characterization as the semantic shift by which a general relation expressed by the adjective is given a subjective reference point in or relative to the speech event.

Type
Research Article
Information
English Language & Linguistics , Volume 12 , Issue 3 , November 2008 , pp. 475 - 503
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adamson, Sylvia & González-Díaz, Victorina. 2004. Back to the very beginning: The development of intensifiers in ME-EModE. Presented at ICEHL 13, University of Vienna.Google Scholar
Bache, Carl. 2000. Essentials of mastering English: A concise grammar. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benveniste, Emile. 1966. Problèmes de linguistique générale, vol. 1. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight. 1967. Adjectives in English: Attribution and predication. Lingua 18, 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breban, Tine. 2002. Adjectives of comparison: Postdeterminer, epithet and classifier uses. MA dissertation, University of Leuven.Google Scholar
Breban, Tine. 2002/2003. The grammaticalization of the adjectives of identity and difference in English and Dutch. Languages in Contrast 4 (1), 167–201.Google Scholar
Breban, Tine. 2006a. The grammaticalization of the English adjectives of comparison: A diachronic case study. In Facchinetti, Roberta & Rissanen, Matti (eds.), Corpus linguistic studies in diachronic English, 253–88. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Breban, Tine. 2006b. Grammaticalization and subjectification of the English adjectives of general comparison. In Athanasiadou, Angeliki, Canakis, Costas & Cornillie, Bert (eds.), Subjectification: Various paths to subjectivity, 241–78. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Breban, Tine. 2006c. English adjectives of general comparison: Lexical versus grammaticalized uses. PhD dissertation, University of Leuven.Google Scholar
Breban, Tine. Forthcoming. The grammaticalization and subjectification of English adjectives expressing difference into plurality/distributivity markers and quantifiers. Folia Linguistica.Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel. 2002. Grammaticalization versus lexicalization reconsidered: On the ‘late’ use of temporal adverbs. In Fanego, Teresa, Pérez-Guerra, Javier & López-Couso, María José (eds.), English historical syntax and morphology: Selected papers from 11 ICEHL, 67–97. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brisard, Frank (ed.). 2002. Grounding: The epistemic footing of deixis and reference. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan. 2003. Mechanisms of change in grammaticalization: The role of frequency. In Joseph, Brian & Janda, Richard (eds.), The handbook of historical linguistics, 602–23. London: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crain, Stephen & Hamburger, Henry. 1992. Semantics, knowledge and NP modification. In Levine, Robert (ed.), Formal grammar: Theory and implementation. Vancouver Studies in Cognitive Science, vol. 2, 372–401. Vancouver: The University of British Columbia Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidse, Kristin. 2004. The interaction of identification and quantification in English determiners. In Achard, Michel & Kemmer, Suzanne (eds.), Language, culture and mind, 507–33. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Davidse, Kristin, Brems, Lieselotte & DeSmedt, Liesbeth. 2008. Type noun uses in the English NP: A case of left-to-right layering. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 13 (2), 139–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Declerck, Renaat. 2006. The grammar of the English verb phrase, vol. 1: The grammar of the English tense system: A comprehensive analysis. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Denison, David. 2005. History of the sort of construction family. Presented at the Second International Conference on Construction Grammar, Helsinki, 6–8 September 2002. Updated version available on www.llc.manchester.ac.uk/SubjectAreas/LinguisticsEnglishLanguage/AcademicStaff/DavidDenison/.Google Scholar
Denison, David. 2006. Category change and gradience in the determiner system. In vanKemenade, Ans & Los, Bettelou (eds.), The handbook of the history of English, 279–304. Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Smet, Hendrik. 2005. A corpus of late modern English texts. ICAME-Journal 29, 69–82.Google Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. 1982. Where have all the adjectives gone? And other essays in semantics and syntax. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, Nick & Wilkins, David. 2000. In the mind's ear: The semantic extensions of perception verbs in Australian languages. Language 76, 546–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Olga. 1992. Syntax. In Blake, Norman (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language, vol. 2: 1066–1476, 207–408. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1994. An introduction to functional grammar. 2nd edition. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Hawkins, John. 1978. Definiteness and indefiniteness: A study in reference and grammaticality prediction. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Heytens, Charlotte, Pirlet, Hanne & Van Parys, Thomas. 2004. The lexicalisation and grammaticalisation of the premodifying adjectives old, complete and pure. Term paper, University of Leuven.Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul & Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2003. Grammaticalization. 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney & Pullum, Geoffrey. 2002. The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 1991. Foundations of cognitive grammar, vol. 2: Descriptive application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 2002a. Deixis and subjectivity. In Brisard (ed.), 1–27.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 2002b. Remarks on the English grounding systems. In Brisard (ed.), 29–38.Google Scholar
Lehmann, Christian. 1985. Grammaticalization: Synchronic variation and diachronic change. Lingua e Stile 20, 303–18.Google Scholar
Matthews, Peter. 1997. The concise Oxford dictionary of linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nuyts, Jan. 2005. The modal confusion: On terminology and the concepts behind it. In Klinge, Alex & Høeg-Müller, Henrik (eds.), Modality: Studies in form and function, 5–38. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Oxford English dictionary, 1933. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Palmer, Frank. 1990. Modality and the English modals. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Paradis, Carita. 2000. Reinforcing adjectives: A cognitive semantic perspective on grammaticalization. In Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo, Denison, David, Hogg, Richard M. & McCully, C. B. (eds.), Generative theory and corpus studies, 233–58. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey & Svartvik, Jan. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Sanford, Anthony & Garrod, Simon. 1998. The role of scenario mapping in text comprehension. Discourse Processes 26, 159–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, John. 1991. Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sinclair, John et al. (eds.). 1990. The Collins COBUILD English grammar. London: Collins.Google Scholar
Tallir, Tinneke. 2000. The postdeterminer: A corpus-based investigation. MA dissertation, University of Leuven.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1989. On the rise of epistemic meanings in English: An example of subjectification in semantic change. Language 65, 31–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Dasher, Richard. 2002. Regularity in semantic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Van linden, An & Davidse, Kristin. 2005. Degrees of subjectivity of prenominal adjectives: Diachronic change, linear order, and constructional relations as determining factors. Presented at FITIGRA, University of Leuven.Google Scholar
Verstraete, Jean-Christophe. 2001. Subjective and objective modality: Interpersonal and ideational functions in the English modal auxiliary system. Journal of Pragmatics 33, 1505–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verstraete, Jean-Christophe. 2007. Rethinking the coordinate-subordinate dichotomy. Interpersonal grammar and the analysis of adverbial clauses in English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wardhaugh, Ronald. 1997. Understanding English grammar: A linguistic approach. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar