Split coordination in English
Why we need parsed corpora
In this article we provide a practical demonstration of how syntactically annotated corpora (treebanks), particularly the English
Historical Parsed Corpora Series, can be used to investigate research questions with a diachronic depth and synchronic breadth
that would not otherwise be possible. The phenomenon under investigation is split coordination, in which two parts of a conjoined
constituent appear separated in the clause (e.g., and this is where my aunt lives and my
uncle
). It affects every type of coordinated constituent (subject/object DPs, predicate and attributive ADJPs,
ADVPs, PPs and DP objects of P) in Old English (OE); and it, or a superficially similar construction, occurs continuously
throughout the attested period from approximately 800 to the present day. Despite its synchronic range and diachronic persistence,
split coordination has received surprisingly little attention in the diachronic literature, with the exception of Perez Lorido’s (2009) limited study of split subjects in eight OE texts. Its modern
counterpart is most frequently analysed as Bare Argument Ellipsis (BAE). Although the OE and Present-Day English constructions
appear superficially similar, we show that not all of the OE data is amenable to a BAE analysis. We bring to bear different types
of evidence (structural, discourse/performance effects, rate of change, etc.) to argue that split coordination in fact represents
two different constructions, one of which remains stable over time while the other is lost in the post-Middle English
period.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.The case study
- 2.1Extracting the data
- 2.2The distribution of split subject coordination over time
- 2.3A comparison of PDE with earlier stages of the language
- 2.4Factors favouring the splitting of conjuncts
- 3.Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
-
References
References (26)
Arnold, Jennifer, Anthony Losongco, Thomas Wasow & Ryan Ginstrom
2000 Heaviness vs. newness: The effects of structural complexity and discourse status on constituent ordering.
Language 76(1). 28–55.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bech, Kristin
2001 Word order patterns in Old and Middle English: A syntactic and pragmatic study. PhD thesis, University of Bergen.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Biberauer, Theresa & Ans van Kemenade
2011 Subject positions and information-structural diversification in the history of English.
Catalan Journal of Linguistics 101. 17–69.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Busquets, Joan
2006 Stripping vs. VP-ellipsis in Catalan: What is deleted and when? Probus 181. 159–187.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hankamer, Jorge & Ivan Sag
1976 Deep and surface anaphora.
Linguistic Inquiry 71. 391–426.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hinterhölzl, Roland
2009 Information structure and unmarked word order in (Older) Germanic. In
Caroline Féry &
Malte Zimmerman (eds.),
Information structure from different perspectives, 282–304. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Johnson, Kyle
2006 Gapping. In
Martin Everaert &
Henk van Riemsdijk (eds.),
The Blackwell companion to syntax, 407–435. Oxford: Blackwell.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kiss, Katalin
1996 Two subject positions in English.
Linguistic Review 131. 119–142.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kemenade, Ans van, & Tanja Milićev
2012 Syntax and discourse in Old English and Middle English word order. In
Dianne Jonas &
Stephen Anderson (eds.),
Grammatical change: Origins, nature, outcomes (Proceedings of DIGS VIII), 237–255. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kohonen, Viljo
1978 On the development of English word order in religious prose around 1000 and 1200 ad
. Åbo: Åbo Akademi Foundation.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Konietzko, Andreas & Susanne Winkler
2010 Contrastive ellipsis: Mapping between syntax and information structure.
Lingua 1201. 1436–1457.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mitchell, Bruce
1985 Old English syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Munn, Alan
1993 Topics in the syntax and semantics of coordinate structures. PhD thesis, University of Maryland.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Perez Lorido, Rodrigo
2009 Reconsidering the role of syntactic “heaviness” in Old English split coordination.
Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 451. 31–56.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pintzuk, Susan & Ann Taylor
2006 The loss of OV order in the history of English. In
Ans van Kemenade &
Bettelou Los (eds.),
The handbook of the history of English, 249–278. Oxford: Blackwell.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Reinhart, Tanya
1991 Elliptic conjunctions: Non-quantificational LF. In
Aka Kasher (ed.),
The Chomskyan turn, 360–384. Oxford: Blackwell.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Reszkiewicz, Alfred
1966 Split constructions in Old English. In
Mieczyslaw Brahmen,
Stanislaw Helsztyński &
Julian Krzyzanowski (eds.),
Studies in language and literature in honour of Margaret Schlauch, 313–326. Warsaw: Polish Scientific Publishers.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ross, John R.
1967 Constraints on variables in syntax. PhD thesis, MIT.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sielanko, Elzbieta
1994 Split coordinated structures in late Old English.
Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 241. 58–72.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Taylor, Ann & Susan Pintzuk
2011 The interaction of syntactic change and information status effects in the change from OV to VO in English.
Catalan Journal of Linguistics 101. 71–94.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Taylor, Ann & Susan Pintzuk
2012a The effect of information structure on object position in Old English: A pilot study. In
Maria-Jose López-Couso,
Bettelou Los &
Anneli Meurman-Solin (eds.),
Information structure and syntactic change, 47–65. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Taylor, Ann & Susan Pintzuk
2012b Rethinking the OV/VO alternation in Old English: The effect of complexity, grammatical weight and information structure. In
Terttu Nevalainen &
Elizabeth Traugott (eds.),
The Oxford handbook of the history of English, 835–845. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Taylor, Ann & Susan Pintzuk
Taylor, Ann & Susan Pintzuk
2017 Split coordination in Early English. In
Bettelou Los &
Pieter de Haan (eds.),
Word order change in acquisition and language contact: Essays in honour of Ans van Kemenade, 155–183. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Traugott, Elizabeth
1972 A history of English syntax. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (1)
Cited by 1 other publications
Taylor, Ann
2020.
Treebanks in Historical Syntax.
Annual Review of Linguistics 6:1
► pp. 195 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 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.