While recent years have seen an increased interest for the potential effects of language contact on the formal and/or semantic properties of constructions, existing case studies of (potentially) contact-induced change in individual constructions (e.g. Pietsch 2010; Höder 2012, 2014; Van de Velde and Zenner 2010; Colleman and Noël 2014, etc.) have so far made little impact on the booming field of diachronic construction grammar at large, i.e. they have stayed largely under the radar of constructionist theorizing about language change. The present paper reflects on the theoretical significance of a recent innovation in Dutch, viz. the emergence of an argument structure construction that mirrors the form and semantics of the English ‘time’-away construction first described in Jacken-doff (1997). While it is fairly uncontroversial that English influence has something to do with this innovation, it is by no means easy to determine exactly what has happened. Even though an alternative scenario, in which the new Dutch pattern developed out of pre-existing Dutch pattern featuring weg ‘away’, cannot be ruled out, I will argue that one plausible way of accounting for the observed facts is to assume that a ready-made English form-meaning unit was copied into Dutch. On this view, the observed change would count as an instance of instantaneous grammatical constructionalization.
Barðdal, Jóhanna, Elena Smirnova, Lotte Sommerer, and Spike Gildea (eds). 2015. Diachronic Construction Grammar. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Boogaart, Ronny, Timothy Colleman, and Gijsbert Rutten. 2014. “Constructions all the Way Everywhere: Four New Directions in Constructionist Research.” In Extending the Scope of Construction Grammar, ed. by Ronny Boogaart, Timothy Colleman, and Gijsbert Rutten, 1–14. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Booij, Geert. 2010. Construction Morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cappelle, Bert. 2005. Particle Patterns in English: a Comprehensive Coverage. Ph.D. thesis, University of Leuven.
Dixon, R.M.W.2005. A Semantic Approach to English Grammar. Second edition. New York: Oxford University Press.
Doğruöz, Seza, and Ad Backus. 2009. “Innovative Constructions in Dutch Turkish: An Assessment of On-going Contact Induced Change.” Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 12 (1): 41–63.
Elenbaas, Marjon. 2007. The Synchronic and Diachronic Syntax of the English Verb-Particle Combination. Utrecht: LOT publications.
Fried, Mirjam. 2013. “Principles of Constructional Change.” In The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar, ed. by Thomas Hoffmann, and Graeme Trousdale, 419–437. New York: Oxford University Press.
Goldberg, Adele E.1995. Constructions. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
Goldberg, Adele E.. 2003. “Constructions: A New Theoretical Approach to Language.” Trends in Cognitive Science 71: 219–224.
Goldberg, Adele E.. 2006. Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gries, Stefan Th. 2008. “Phraseology and linguistic theory: a brief survey.” In Phraseology: an Interdisciplinary Perspective, ed. by Sylviane Granger, and Fanny Meunier, 3–25. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Grondelaers, Stefan, Katrien Deygers, Hilde van Aken, Vicky Van den Heede, and Dirk Speelman. 2000. “Het CONDIV-corpus geschreven Nederlands [The CONDIV corpus of written Dutch].” Nederlandse Taalkunde 51: 356–363.
Heine, Bernd, and Tania Kuteva. 2005. Language Contact and Grammatical Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hilpert, Martin. 2013. Constructional Change in English: Developments in Allomorphy, Word Formation, and Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jackendoff, Ray. 1997. “Twistin’ the Night Away.” Language 731: 534–559.
Jackendoff, Ray. 2013. “Constructions in the Parallel Architecture.” In The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar, ed. by Thomas Hoffmann, and Graeme Trousdale, 70–92. New York: Oxford University Press.
McIntyre, Andrew. 2003. “Preverbs, Argument Linking and Verb Semantics: German Prefixes and Particles.” In Yearbook of Morphology 2003, ed. by Geert Booij, and Jaap van Marle, 119–144. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Pietsch, Lukas. 2010. “What has Changed in Hiberno-English: Constructions and Their Role in Contact-induced Change.” Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 631: 118–145.
Traugott, Elizabeth C.2008a. “The Grammaticalization of NP of NP Patterns.” In Constructions and Language Change, ed. by Alexander Bergs, and Gabriele Diewald, 23–45. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Traugott, Elizabeth C.2008b. “Grammaticalization, Constructions and the Incremental Development of Language: Suggestions from the Development of Degree Modifiers in English.” In Variation, Selection, Development: Probing the Evolutionary Model of Language Change, ed. by Regine Eckhardt, Gerhard Jäger, and Tonjes Veenstra, 219–250. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Van de Velde, Freek, and Eline Zenner. 2010. “Pimp my Lexis: het nut van corpusonderzoek in normatief taaladvies [Pimp my lexis: the use of corpus research in normative language advice].” In Liever meer of juist minder? Over normen en variatie in taal [Preferably more or rather less? On norms and variation in language], ed. by Els Hendrickx, Karl Hendrickx, Willy Martin, Hans Smessaert, William Van Belle, and Joop van der Horst, 51–68. Gent: Academia press.
Weinreich, Uriel. 1953 [1964]. Languages in Contact. Second edition. The Hague: Mouton.
WNT = De Vries, M., L.A. Te Winkelet al. (ed.) (1882–1998). Woordenboek der Nederlandsche Taal [Dictionary of the Dutch Language]. Gravenhage: Martinus Nijhoff etc.
2018. Most borrowable construction ever! A large-scale approach to contact-induced pragmatic change. Journal of Pragmatics 133 ► pp. 134 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.