Cover not available
Part of
Historical Linguistics 2022: Selected papers from the 25th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Oxford, 1–5 August 2022
Edited by Holly Kennard, Emily Lindsay-Smith, Aditi Lahiri and Martin Maiden
[Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 369] 2025
► pp. 280–294

Approximative adverbs in modern and pre-modern languages

| University of Groningen
Approximative adverbs such as almost, nearly, approximately and circa have received relatively little attention in historical linguistics. This paper documents how approximative expressions become more frequent as well as more lexically diverse in two European languages, to wit English and Dutch. We argue that this change is not simply a language-internal matter, comparable to, say, the rise of modal verbs in Germanic, but reflects a cultural change as well, one having to do with an increasing concern with precision when it comes to numbers and measures (such as weights or temperatures). We make a distinction among various classes of modified expressions, including numerals, quantifiers and absolute adjectives, and irrealis uses (I almost made a mistake), and show how diachronic developments point toward increasing specialization.
Keywords: approximative adverbs, lexical diversity, scalar endpoints, cultural factors
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Rise of approximators
  • 3.Classification and distribution
  • 4.Diachronic changes
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
References (16)
References
Bouma, Gosse, Petra Hendriks & Jack Hoeksema. 2007. Focus particles inside prepositional phrases: A comparison of Dutch, English, and German. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 10(1). 1–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 2001. The European linguistic area: Standard Average European. In Martin Haspelmath, Ekkehard König, Wulf Oesterreicher & Wolfgang Raible (eds.), Language typology and language universals, Vol. 2, 1492–510. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoeksema, Jack. 2005. Rijkdom en weelde van het Nederlands. Tabu 34(1). 1–12.Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence R. 1972. On the semantic properties of logical operators in English. Doctoral dissertation, UCLA.
2017. Almost et al.: Scalar adverbs revisited. In Chungmin Lee, Ferenc Kiefer & Manfred Krifka (eds.), Contrastiveness in Information Structure, Alternatives and Scalar Implicatures. Springer, n.pl. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, Christopher, & Louise McNally. 2005. Scale structure, degree modification, and the semantics of gradable predicates. Language 81(2). 345–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klein, Henny. 1998. Adverbs of degree in Dutch and related languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krifka, Manfred. 2009. Approximate interpretations of number words: A case for strategic communication. In Erhard Hinrichs & John Nerbonne (eds.), Theory and evidence in semantics, 109–32. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Lewis, David K. 1973. Counterfactuals. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Pozzan, Lucia & Susan Schweitzer. 2008. Not ‘nearly’ synonymous. Similarities and differences between ‘almost’ and ‘nearly’. Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 12. 485–507.Google Scholar
Rotstein, Carmen & Yoad Winter. 2004. Total adjectives vs. partial adjectives: scale structure and higher-order modification. Natural Language Semantics, 12. 259–88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sadock, Jerrold. 1981. Almost. In Peter Cole (ed.), Radical Pragmatics, 257–71. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Stalnaker, Robert C. 1968. A theory of conditionals. In Nicholas Rescher (ed.), Studies in logical theory, 98–112. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stoffel, Cornelis. 1901. Intensives and down-toners. A study in English adverbs. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
Ziegeler, Debra. 2016. Intersubjectivity and the diachronic development of counterfactual almost. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 17(1). 1–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zwarts, Frans. 1985. De zaak vrijwel. Tabu 15(4). 145–49.Google Scholar