Chapter 6
Category change in the English gerund
Tangled web or fine-tuned constructional network?
This study considers the diachronic categorial shift from nominal (NG) to verbal gerunds (VG) in Middle English in terms of Langacker’s functional account of noun phrases and clauses as ‘deictic expressions’. The analysis shows that the Middle English gerund was essentially formally nominal but functionally hybrid, thus exhibiting ‘form-function friction’. This friction furthered a split in the gerundive system between a verbal component associated with clausal deixis, alongside a nominal component, which specialized in nominal deixis; but this split is not absolute. The constructionist idea of language as a network of (inter)paradigmatically connected constructions helps to explain why the verbal gerund seems to simultaneously drift away from and again partake in the deictic behaviour of the nominal category.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Goals and methodology
- 3.Gerunds: Nominal and clausal deixis
- 3.1Qualitative analysis: Types of deixis
- 3.2Quantitative analysis: The rise of clausal deixis in bare nominal and verbal gerunds
- 4.Reflections on category change: Is the verbalization of the gerund a case of constructionalization?
- 5.Concluding remarks
-
Notes
-
References
References
Aarts, B.
(
2007)
Syntactic gradience: The nature of grammatical indeterminacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Booij, G.
(
2010)
Construction morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Colleman, T., & De Clerck, B.
(
2011)
Constructional semantics on the move: On semantic specialization in the English double object construction.
Cognitive Linguistics, 22(1), 183–209.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Croft, W.
(
1991)
Syntactic categories and grammatical relations: The cognitive organization of information. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Croft, W.
(
2001)
Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dal, I.
(
1952)
Zur Entstehung des englischen Participium Praesentis auf ‑ing
.
Norsk Tidsskrift for Sprogvidenskap, 16, 5–116.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
De Smet, H.
(
2008)
Functional motivations in the development of nominal and verbal gerunds in Middle and Early Modern English.
English Language and Linguistics, 12, 55–101.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
De Smet, H.
(
2010)
English ‑ing – clauses and their problems: The structure of grammatical categories.
Linguistics, 48(6), 1153–1193.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
De Smet, H.
(
2013)
Spreading patterns: Diffusional change in the English system of complementation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
De Smet, H., & Heyvaert, L.
(
2011)
The meaning of present participles.
English Language and Linguistics, 15, 473–498.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
De Smet, H., & Van de Velde, F.
De Smet, H., & Van de Velde, F.
(
2014)
Travelling features: multiple sources, multiple destinations. Paper presented at the
Eighth International Conference on Construction Grammar (ICCG8). University of Osnabrück
3–6 September 2014.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fanego, T.
(
1996)
The gerund in Early Modern English: Evidence from the Helsinki Corpus.
Folia Linguistica Historica, 17, 97–152.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fanego, T.
(
1998)
Developments in argument linking in Early Modern English gerund phrases.
English Language and Linguistics, 2(1), 87–119.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fonteyn, L., & van de Pol, N.
(
2016)
Divide and conquer: The formation and functional dynamics of the Modern English ing-clause network.
English Language and Linguistics. Retrieved from:
[URL] doi:
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
Fonteyn, L., Heyvaert, L., & Maekelberghe, C.
(
2015)
How do gerunds conceptualize events? A diachronic study.
Cognitive Linguistics, 26(4), 583–612.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Francis, E. J., & Michaelis, L. A.
(Eds.) (
2003)
Mismatch: Form-function incongruity and the architecture of grammar. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Goldberg, A.
(
1995)
Constructions: A Construction Grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Goldberg, A.
(
2006)
Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Halliday, M. A. K.
(
1961)
Categories of the theory of grammar.
Word, 17(3), 241–292.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hartmann, S.
(
2014)
“Nominalization” taken literally: A diachronic corpus study of German word-formation patterns.
Italian Journal of Linguistics, 26, Special Issue “New Territories in Word-Formation”, 123–156.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Heyvaert, L.
(
2000)
Gerundive nominalization. In
A. Foolen, &
F. van der Leek (Eds.),
Constructions in cognitive linguistics: Selected papers from the Fifth International Cognitive Linguistics Conference, Amsterdam 1997 (pp. 103–121). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Heyvaert, L.
(
2003)
A cognitive-functional approach to deverbal nominalization in English. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter Mouton.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Heyvaert, L.
(
2008)
On the constructional semantics of gerundive nominalizations.
Folia Linguistica, 42(1), 39–82.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Horn, G. M.
(
1975)
On the nonsentential nature of the POSS-ING construction.
Linguistic Analysis, 1(4), 333–387.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Huddleston, R., & Pullum, G. K.
(
2002)
The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hudson, R.
(
2007)
Language networks. The new Word Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jespersen, O.
(
1940)
A Modern English grammar on historical principles (Vol. 5). London: George Allen & Unwin.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kastovsky, D.
(
1985)
Deverbal nouns in Old and Modern English: From stem-formation to word-formation. In
J. Fisiak (Ed.),
Historical semantics: Historical word formation (pp. 221–261). Berlin/New York: De Gruyter Mouton.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Killie, K., & Swan, T.
(
2009)
The grammaticalization and subjectification of adverbial -ing clauses (converb clauses) in English.
English Language and Linguistics, 13(3), 337–363.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kisbye, T.
(
1971)
An historical outline of English syntax. Aarhus: Akademisk Boghandel.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kohnen, T.
(
1996)
Ausbreitungsmuster syntaktischer Standardisierung bei der Entwicklung englischer Partizipialkonstruktionen (Partizip Präsens) 1450–1700.
Anglia, 114, 154–201.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kohnen, T.
(
2001)
The influence of ‘Latinate’ constructions in Early Modern English: Orality and literacy as complementary forces. In
D. Kastovsky, &
A. Mettinger (Eds.),
Language contact in the history of English (pp. 171–194). Frankfurt am Main: Lang.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kohnen, T.
(
2004)
Text, Textsorte, Sprachgeschichte. Englische Partizipial- und Gerundialkonstruktionen 1100 bis 1700. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Langacker, R. W.
(
1987)
Foundations of cognitive grammar (Vol. 1). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Langacker, R. W.
(
2008)
Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Langacker, R. W.
(
2009)
Investigations in Cognitive Grammar. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
LEON0.3
=
Petré, P. (
2013)
LEON: Leuven English Old to New,
Version 0.3.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Malouf, R.
(
2000)
Verbal gerunds as mixed categories in head-driven phrase structure grammar. In
R. D. Borsley (Ed.),
Syntax and Semantics. Volume 32. The nature and function of syntactic categories (pp. 133–166). San Diego: Academic Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Milsark, G. L.
(
1988)
Singl ‑ing
.
Linguistic Inquiry, 19, 611–634.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
PPCEME
=
Kroch, A.,
Beatrice, S., &
Delfs, L. (
2004)
Penn-Helsinki parsed corpus of Early Modern English.
[URL].
PPCMBE
=
Kroch, A.,
Santorini, B., &
Diertani, A. (
2010)
Penn parsed corpus of Modern British English. Retrieved from:
[URL]
Pullum, G. K.
(
1991)
English nominal gerund phrases as noun phrases with verb-phrase heads.
Linguistics, 29, 763–799.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rohdenburg, G.
(
2003)
Cognitive complexity and horror aequi as factors determining the use of interrogative clause linkers in English. In
G. Rohdenburg, &
B. Mondorf (Eds.),
Determinants of grammatical variation in English (pp. 205–250). Berlin/New York: De Gruyter Mouton.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schachter, P.
(
1976)
A nontransformational account of gerundive nominals in English.
Linguistic Inquiry, 7, 205–241.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tajima, M.
(
1985)
The syntactic development of the gerund in Middle English. Tokyo: Nanun-do.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Taylor, J.
(
2002)
Cognitive grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Traugott, E. C., & Trousdale, G.
(
2013)
Constructionalization and constructional changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tuggy, D.
(
2007)
Schematicity. In
D. Geeraerts, &
H. Cuyckens (Eds.),
The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 82–116). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Van de Velde, F.
(
2014)
Degeneracy: The maintenance of constructional networks. In
R. Boogaart,
T. Colleman, &
G. Rutten (Eds.),
Extending the scope of construction grammar (pp. 141–179). Berlin/New York: De Gruyter Mouton.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Vosberg, U.
(
2003)
The Role of extractions and horror aequi in the evolution of ‑ing complements in Modern English. In
G. Rohdenburg, &
B. Mondorf (Eds.),
Determinants of grammatical variation in English (pp. 305–328). Berlin/New York: De Gruyter Mouton.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Yoon, Hye Suk J.
(
1996)
Nominal gerund phrases in English as phrasal zero derivations.
Linguistics, 34(2), 329–356.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by
Cited by 2 other publications
Fonteyn, Lauren & Charlotte Maekelberghe
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 26 june 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.