Cover not available
Article published In:
Journal of Historical Linguistics
Vol. 5:2 (2015) ► pp.177–234

The history of the quasi-auxiliary use(d) to

A usage-based account

| Leipzig University

This article is a corpus-based study on the grammaticalization of the quasi-auxiliary use(d) to. It describes and seeks to explain the historical process whereby use(d) to, starting from the Middle English source construction use ‘be in the habit of’ + to + verb, grammaticalized into a habitual aspect marker with idiosyncratic morphosyntactic properties. A detailed corpus study is presented, based on four historical English corpora, which together cover a time period from 1410 to 2009. The results of the corpus analysis are interpreted within the theoretical framework of usage-based grammar, with the aim of uncovering the mechanisms that propelled the gradual grammaticalization of use(d) to on the semantic, morphological, syntactic and phonological dimensions. Among the underlying mechanisms and processes identified are semantic generalization via host-class expansion and habituation, pragmatic enrichment, analogy, chunking, loss of analyzability and internal structure, as well as phonological reduction through neuromotor automation. Supported by the quantitative empirical evidence from the corpus analysis and drawing on findings from usage-based research on language change, the present study depicts the grammaticalization of use(d) to as a self-feeding process driven by frequency effects, i.e. by the effects that the increasingly high discourse frequency of the use(d) to construction had on its cognitive representation.

Keywords: grammaticalization, usage-based, frequency effects, auxiliation, English
Published online: 11 February 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jhl.5.2.01nee
References
Alexander, Luis G
1988 Longman English Grammar. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Bache, Carl & Niels David-Nielsen
1997 Mastering English: An Advanced Grammar for Non-Native and Native Speakers. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barlow, Michael & Suzanne Kemmer
eds. 2000 Usage-Based Models of Language. Stanford, CA: CLSI Publications.Google Scholar
Barðdal, Jóhanna
2008 Productivity: Evidence from Case and Argument Structure in Icelandic. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beckner, Clay, Richard Blythe, Joan Bybee, Morten H. Christiansen, William Croft, Nick C. Ellis, John Holland, Jinyun Ke, Diane Larsen-Freeman & Tom Schoenemann
2009 Language is a Complex Adaptive System: Position Paper. Language Learning 59:Suppl.1.1–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Binnick, Robert I
2005 The Markers of Habitual Aspect in English. Journal of English Linguistics 33:4.339–369. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006 Used to and Habitual Aspect in English. Style 40:1–2.33–45.Google Scholar
Blumenthal-Dramé, Alice
2012 Entrenchment in Usage-Based Theories: What Corpus Data Do and Do Not Reveal About the Mind. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brems, Lieselotte
2007 The Grammaticalization of Small Size Nouns: Reconsidering Frequency and Analogy. Journal of English Linguistics 35:4.293–324. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan
1985 Morphology: A Study of the Relation between Meaning and Form. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2003a Cognitive Processes in Grammaticalization. The New Psychology of Language, Vol. 21 ed. by Michael Tomasello, 145–167. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
2003b Mechanisms of Change in Grammaticization: The Role of Frequency. In Brian D. Joseph & Richard D. Janda, eds., 602–623. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006 From Usage to Grammar: The Mind’s Response to Repetition. Language 82:4.711–733. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 Language, Usage and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 Usage-Based Theory and Grammaticalization. In Heiko Narrog & Bernd Heine, eds., 69–78.Google Scholar
2013 Usage-Based Theory and Exemplar Representations of Constructions. The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar ed. by Thomas Hoffmann & Graeme Trousdale, 49–69. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan, Revere Perkins & William Pagliuca
1994 The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect, and Modality in the Languages of the World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan & Sandra A. Thompson
1997 Three Frequency Effects in Syntax. Berkeley Linguistics Society 231.378–388. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan & Rena Torres Cacoullos
2009 The Role of Prefabs in Grammaticization: How the Particular and the General Interact in Language Change. Formulaic Language, Vol. 1: Distribution and Historical Change ed. by Robert Corrigan, Edith A. Moravcsik, Hamid Ouali & Kathleen M. Wheatly, 187–217. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carter, Ronald & Michael McCarthy
2006 Cambridge Grammar of English: A Comprehensive Guide; Spoken and Written English Grammar and Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cirillo, Robert
2015 People Didn’t Used to Speak Like That: On the Reanalysis of Used to in English. English Today 31:2.11–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Comrie, Bernard
1976 Aspect: An Introduction to the Study of Verbal Aspect and Related Problems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Croft, William
2000 Explaining Language Change: An Evolutionary Approach. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
2001 Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Danchev, Andrei & Merja Kytö
1994 The Construction Be Going to + Infinitive in Early Modern English. Studies in Early Modern English ed. by Dieter Kastovsky, 59–77. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davies, Mark
2004– BYU-BNC: The British National Corpus. Available at [URL]. Last accessed 21 March 2011.
2008– The Corpus of Contemporary American English: 410+ Million Words, 1990–Present. Available at [URL]. Last accessed 21 March 2011.
2010– The Corpus of Historical American English: 400 Million Words, 1810–2009. Available at [URL]. Last accessed 29 October 2012.
2013 Corpus of Global Web-Based English: 1.9 Billion Words from Speakers in 20 Countries. Available at [URL]. Last accessed 13 Jan. 2014.
Denison, David
1993 English Historical Syntax: Verbal Constructions. London: Longman.Google Scholar
De Smet, Hendrik, comp
2006 The Corpus of Late Modern English Texts (Extended Version). Department of Linguistics, University of Leuven. Available at [URL].
Diessel, Holger
2007 Frequency Effects in Language Acquisition, Language Use, and Diachronic Change. New Ideas in Psychology 251.108–127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, Nick C
1996 Sequencing in SLA: Phonological Memory, Chunking and Points of Order. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 181.91–126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Elsness, Johan
1994 On the Progression of the Progressive in Early Modern English. ICAME Journal 181.5–25.Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga
1994 The Development of Quasi-Auxiliaries in English and Changes in Word Order. Neophilologus 781.137–164. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 Morphosyntactic Change: Functional and Formal Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fowler, Henry Watson
1926 A Dictionary of Modern English Usage. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy
1979 On Understanding Grammar. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1995 Functionalism and Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E
1995 Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
2006 Constructions at Work. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Greenbaum, Sidney
1996 The Oxford English Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Haiman, John
1994 Ritualization and the Development of Language. Perspectives on Grammaticalization ed. by William Pagliuca, 3–28. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hantson, André
2005 The English Perfect and the Anti-Perfect Used to Viewed from a Comparative Perspective. English Studies 86:3.245–268. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin
1999 Why is Grammaticalization Irreversible? Linguistics 37:6.1043–1068. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2004 Explaining the Ditransitive Person-Role Constraint: A Usage-Based Approach. Constructions 2/20041.1–49.Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd, Ulrike Claudi & Friederike Hünnemeyer
1991 Grammaticalization: A Conceptual Framework. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Himmelmann, Nikolaus P
2004 Lexicalization and Grammaticization: Opposite or Orthogonal? What Makes Grammaticalization? A Look from its Fringes and its Components ed. by Walter Bisang, Nikolaus P. Himmelmann & Björn Wiemer, 21–42. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoffmann, Sebastian
2004 Are Low-Frequency Complex Prepositions Grammaticalized? On the Limits of Corpus Data—and the Importance of Intuition. In Hans Lindquist & Christian Mair, eds., 171–210. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hopper, Paul J
1987 Emergent Grammar. Berkeley Linguistics Society 131.139–157. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1991 On Some Principles of Grammaticization. In Elizabeth Closs Traugott & Bernd Heine, eds., 17–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. & Elizabeth Closs Traugott
2003 Grammaticalization. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney & Geoffrey K. Pullum
2002 The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hundt, Marianne
2001 What Corpora Tell Us about the Grammaticalisation of Voice in Get-Constructions. Studies in Language 25:1.49–88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Joseph, Brian D. & Richard D. Janda
eds. 2003 The Handbook of Historical Linguistics. Malden, MA: Blackwell DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jørgensen, Erik
1988 Used To (+ Infinitive). English Studies 69:4.348–354. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krug, Manfred G
1998  Gotta—The Tenth Central Modal in English? Social, Stylistic and Regional Variation in the British National Corpus as Evidence of Ongoing Grammaticalization. The Major Varieties of English ed. by Hans Lindquist, Staffan Klintborg, Magnus Levin & Maria Estling, 177–191. Växjö: Växjö University Press.Google Scholar
2000 Emerging English Modals: A Corpus-Based Study of Grammaticalization. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001 Frequency, Iconicity, Categorization: Evidence from Emerging Modals. Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure ed. by Joan Bybee & Paul Hopper, 309–335. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2003 Frequency as a Determinant in Grammatical Variation and Change. Determinants in Grammatical Variation in English ed. by Günter Rohdenburg & Britta Mondorf, 7–67. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kurath, Hans, Robert E. Lewis & Sherman M. Kuhn
eds 1952–2001 Middle English Dictionary. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Available at [URL].Google Scholar
Kytö, Merja & Jonathan Culpeper, comps
2006 A Corpus of English Dialogues 1560–1760. Distributed through the Oxford Text Archive.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W
1987 Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol. 1: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
2000 A Dynamic Usage-Based Model. In Michael Barlow & Suzanne Kemmer, eds., 1–63.Google Scholar
2009 Investigations in Cognitive Grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey
2013 Where Have All the Modals Gone? An Essay on the Declining Frequency of Core Modal Auxiliaries in Recent Standard English. English Modality: Core, Periphery and Evidentiality ed. by Juana I. Marín-Arrese, Marta Carretero, Jorge Arús Hita & Johan van der Auwera, 95–116. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lehmann, Christian
1982 Thoughts on Grammaticalization: A Programmatic Sketch, Vol. 11. Cologne: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität zu Köln.Google Scholar
Lightfoot, David W
1974 The Diachronic Analysis of the English Modals. Historical Linguistics I: Proceedings of the First International Congress on Historical Linguistics ed. by John M. Anderson & Charles Jones, 219–249. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
Lindquist, Hans & Christian Mair
eds. 2004 Corpus Approaches to Grammaticalization in English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mair, Christian
2004 Corpus Linguistics and Grammaticalisation Theory: Statistics, Frequencies, and Beyond. In Hans Lindquist & Christian Mair, eds., 121–150. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 Grammaticalization and Corpus Linguistics. In Heiko Narrog & Bernd Heine, eds., 239–250.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Keith
2003 Had Better and Might as Well: On the Margins of Modality? Modality in Contemporary English ed. by Roberta Facchinetti, Manfred G. Krug & Frank R. Palmer, 129–149. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nagy C., Katalin
2010 The Pragmatics of Grammaticalisation: The Role of Implicatures in Semantic Change. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 11:1.67–95. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Narrog, Heiko & Bernd Heine
eds. 2011 The Oxford Handbook of Grammaticalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Neels, Jakob
2011 The Quasi-Auxiliary Used to in British and American English: A Corpus-Based Case Study. Unpublished Manuscript. Leipzig University, Institute of British Studies.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu, Helena Raumolin-Brunberg, Jukka Keränen, Minna Nevala, Arja Nurmi & Minna Palander-Collin, comps
2006 Parsed Corpus of Early English Correspondence, Text Version, with Additional Annotation by Ann Taylor. Helsinki: University of Helsinki and York: University of York. Distributed through the Oxford Text Archive.Google Scholar
Newell, Allen
1990 Unified Theories of Cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Noël, Dirk
2007 Diachronic Construction Grammar and Grammaticalization Theory. Functions of Language 14:2.177–202. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peng, Rui
2012 Critical Frequency as an Independent Variable in Grammaticalization. Studies in Language 36:2.345–381. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Plank, Frans
1984 The Modal Story Retold. Studies in Language 81.305–366. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik
1985 A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Rissanen, Matti
1999 Syntax. The Cambridge History of the English Language, Vol. 3, 1476–1776 ed. by Robert Lass, 187–331. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg
2010 Does Frequency in Text Instantiate Entrenchment in the Cognitive System? Quantitative Methods in Cognitive Semantics ed. by Dylan Glynn & Kerstin Fischer, 101–134. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2014 Lexico-Grammatical Patterns, Pragmatic Associations and Discourse Frequency. Constructions Collocations Patterns ed. by Thomas Herbst, Hans-Jörg Schmid & Susen Faulhaber, 239–293. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Schulz, Monika Edith
2012 Morphosyntactic Variation in British English Dialects: Evidence from Possession, Obligation and Past Habituality. Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Scott, Mike
1998 WordSmith Tools Version 3.0. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sinclair, John
ed. 1990 Collins COBUILD English Grammar. London: Collins.Google Scholar
Smith, Nicholas
2003 Changes in the Modals and Semi-Modals of Strong Obligation and Epistemic Necessity in Recent British English. Modality in Contemporary English ed. by Roberta Facchinetti, Manfred G. Krug & Frank R. Palmer, 241–266. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali
2004 Have to, Gotta, Must: Grammaticalisation, Variation and Specialization in English Deontic Modality. In Hans Lindquist & Christian Mair, eds., 33–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali & Helen Lawrence
2000 I Used to Dance, but I Don’t Dance Now: The Habitual Past in English. Journal of English Linguistics 28:4.324–353. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, Michael
2003 Constructing a Language: A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Torres Cacoullos, Rena & James Walker
2011 Collocations in Grammaticalization and Variation. In Heiko Narrog & Bernd Heine, eds., 225–238.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
2003 Constructions in Grammaticalization. In Brian D. Joseph & Richard D. Janda, eds., 624–647. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 Grammaticalization. Historical Pragmatics ed. by Andreas H. Jucker & Irma Taavitsainen, 97–126. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Richard B. Dasher
2002 Regularities in Semantic Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Bernd Heiene
eds. 1991 Approaches to Grammaticalization, Vol. 11. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Ekkehard König
1991 The Semantics-Pragmatics of Grammaticalization Revisited. In Elizabeth Closs Traugott & Bernd Heine, eds., 189–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Graeme Trousdale
2013 Constructionalization and Constructional Changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trousdale, Graeme
2012 Grammaticalization, Constructions and the Grammaticalization of Constructions. Grammaticalization and Language Change: New Reflections ed. by Kristin Davidse, Tine Breban, Lieselotte Brems & Tanja Mortelmans, 167–198. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
“use, v.” OED Online
. June 2014 Oxford University Press. 14 August 2014. Available at [URL].
Van Kemenade, Ans
1992 The History of the English Modals: A Reanalysis. Folia Linguistica Historica 13:1–2.143–166.Google Scholar
Visser, Fredericus Th
1969 An Historical Syntax of the English Language, Vol. 3: Syntactical Units with Two Verbs. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Warner, Anthony
1990 Reworking the History of English Auxiliaries. Papers from the 5th International Conference on English Historical Linguistics ed. by Sylvia Adamson, Vivien A. Law, Nigel Vincent & Susan Wright, 537–559. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logo
Ziegeler, Debra
2004 Reanalysis in the History of Do: A View from Construction Grammar. Cognitive Linguistics 15:4.529–574. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 5 other publications

Dekalo, Volodymyr
2021. Exploring relative degrees of auxiliarization empirically in German modal constructions with wissen and verstehen. In Modality and Diachronic Construction Grammar [Constructional Approaches to Language, 32], ► pp. 53 ff. DOI logo
Hilpert, Martin, Bert Cappelle & Ilse Depraetere
2021. Modality in Diachronic Construction Grammar. In Modality and Diachronic Construction Grammar [Constructional Approaches to Language, 32], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
la Roi, Ezra
2022. Down the paths to the past habitual: its historical connections with counterfactual pasts, future in the pasts, iteratives and lexical sources in Ancient Greek. Folia Linguistica 0:0 DOI logo
Lorenz, David & David Tizón-Couto
2020. Chapter 4. Not just frequency, not just modality. In Re-Assessing Modalising Expressions [Studies in Language Companion Series, 216], ► pp. 79 ff. DOI logo
Neels, Jakob
2020. Lifespan change in grammaticalisation as frequency-sensitive automation: William Faulkner and thelet aloneconstruction. Cognitive Linguistics 31:2 ► pp. 339 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 26 august 2023. 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.