Cover not available
Article published In:
The Linguistic Expression of Mirativity
Edited by Agnès Celle and Anastasios Tsangalidis
[Review of Cognitive Linguistics 15:2] 2017
► pp. 411–437

Raising turn out in Late Modern English

The rise of a mirative predicate

| University of Santiago de Compostela
Present-day English turn out is used in several constructions with mirative and evidential overtones. Among these, the raised subject construction and the impersonal construction stand out. The current paper provides a diachronic account of the changes that led to the emergence of these constructions. It examines the semantic and syntactic configuration of turn out and the mechanisms whereby this verb developed evidential and mirative readings during the Late Modern English period. The record shows that turn out developed abruptly from a full lexical (predominantly resultative and change-of-state) control verb into a raising verb in the course of the eighteenth century. This change was triggered by a process of semantic generalization and subjectification whereby the verb acquired evidential and, most notably, mirative nuances. Analogy seems to have played an important role as well, since the evidence suggests that other constructions somewhat similar in form (syntactic structural usage) and meaning facilitated this process. The bulk of the data examined in this study were drawn from the Oxford English Dictionary and the Corpus of Late Modern English Texts, version 3.0.
Keywords: turn out , Late Modern English, subjectification, mirativity, evidentiality
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Evidentiality and mirativity
  • 3.A synchronic overview of mirative turn out constructions
    • 3.1Raised subject construction
    • 3.2Impersonal construction
  • 4.Diachronic development of mirative turn out
    • 4.1An abridged (early) history of turn out
    • 4.2On the path towards mirative turn out: Focus on Late Modern English
      • 4.2.1Sense I
      • 4.2.2Sense II
      • 4.2.3Sense III
    • 4.3Mirative turn out in CLMET3.0
      • 4.3.1Raised subject construction
      • 4.3.2Impersonal construction
  • 5.Summary and discussion
  • 6.Concluding remarks
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Data sources
  • References
Published online: 8 December 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.15.2.05ser
References (54)
Data sources
CLMET3.0 = The Corpus of Late Modern English Texts, version 3.0. H. De Smet, H. J. Diller & J. Tyrkkö. (2013). Available at: [URL].Google Scholar
COCA = The Corpus of Contemporary American English. M. Davies. (2008-). Available at: [URL].Google Scholar
EEBOCorp1.0 = Early English Books Online Corpus 1.0. P. Petré. (2013). Available at: [URL].Google Scholar
HC = The Helsinki Corpus of English Texts. M. Rissanen, M. Kytö, L. Kahlas-Tarkka, M. Kilpiö, S. Nevanlinna, I. Taavitsainen, T. Nevalainen, & H. Raumolin-Brunberg. (1991).Google Scholar
OBC = The Old Bailey Corpus: Spoken English in the 18th and 19th centuries. M. Huber, M. Nissel, P. Maiwald, & B. Widlitzki. (2012). Available at: [URL].Google Scholar
OED = Oxford English Dictionary Online. Oxford University Press. Available online at: [URL].
References
Aikhenvald, A. Y. (2004). Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2012). The essence of mirativity. Linguistic Typology, 16(3), 435–85. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boye, K. (2010). Raising verbs and auxiliaries in a functional theory of grammatical status. In K. Boye & E. Engberg-Pedersen (Eds.), Language usage and language structure (pp. 73–104). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boye, K., & Harder, P. (2007). Complement-taking predicates: Usage and linguistic structure. Studies in Language, 31(3), 569–606. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brinton, L. (2008). The comment clause in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chafe, W. (1986). Evidentiality in English conversation and academic writing. In W. Chafe & J. Nichols (Eds.), Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology (pp. 261–272). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Chafe, W., & Nichols, J. (Eds.). (1986). Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Cornillie, B. (2007). Evidentiality and epistemic modality in Spanish (semi)auxiliaries: A cognitive-functional approach. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
(2008). On the grammaticalization and (inter)subjectivity of evidential (semi)auxiliaries in Spanish. In E. Seoane & M. J. López-Couso (Eds.), Theoretical and empirical issues in grammaticalization (pp. 55–76). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Smet, H. (2009). Analyzing reanalysis. Lingua, 119(11), 1728–1755. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010). Grammatical interference: Subject marker for and the phrasal verb particles out and forth . In E. C. Traugott & G. Trousdale (Eds.), Gradience, gradualness and grammaticalization (pp. 75–104). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
DeLancey, S. (1997). Mirativity: The grammatical marking of unexpected information. Linguistic Typology, 1(1), 33–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2001). The mirative and evidentiality. Journal of Pragmatics, 33(3), 369–382. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012). Still mirative after all these years. Linguistic Typology, 16(3), 529–564.Google Scholar
Diewald, G., & Smirnova, E. (Eds). (2010a). Linguistic realization of evidentiality in European languages. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(Eds). (2010b). Evidentiality in German: linguistic realization and regularities in grammaticalization. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Faller, M. (2002). Semantics and pragmatics of evidentials in Cuzco Quechua. Standford, CA: Stanford University dissertation.Google Scholar
Gentens, C., Kimps, D., Davidse, K., Jacobs, G., Van Linden, A., & Brems, L. (2016). Mirativity and rhetorical structure. In G. Kaltenböck, E. Keizer, & A. Lohmann (Eds.), Outside the clause: Form and function of extra-clausal constituents (pp. 125–56). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gipper, S. (2014). From inferential to mirative: An interaction-based account of an emerging semantic extension. In E. Coussé & F. von Mengden (Eds.), Usage-based approaches to language change (pp. 83–116). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Gisborne, N., & Holmes, J. (2007). A history of English evidential verbs of appearance. English Language and Linguistics, 11(1), 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
González, M. J., & Maldonado, R. (1998). La perfectividad como fuente de contraexpectativas: Resulta que ‘x’ finalmente ‘y’ . In Memorias del IV encuentro de internacional de lingüística en el Noroeste (Vol. 21) (pp. 61–82). Hermosillo: Universidad Autónoma de Sonora.Google Scholar
Heine, B., & Kuteva, T. (2002). World lexicon of grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, B., & Miyashita, H. (2008). Accounting for a functional category: German drohen ‘to threaten’. Language Sciences, 30(1), 53–101. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hengeveld, K., & Olbertz, H. (2012). Didn’t you know? Mirativity does exist! Linguistic Typology, 16(3), 487–503. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hill, N. (2012). “Mirativity” does not exist: ḥdug in “Lhasa” Tibetan and other suspects. Linguistic Typology, 16(3), 389–433. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Howe, C., & Heller, B. (2010). Turns out they weren’t much of a stretch: Variable patterns of structural persistence. Paper presented at 39th New Ways of Analyzing Variation (NWAV 39), University of Texas at San Antonio, 4–6 November.
Huddleston, R., & Pullum, G. K. (2002). The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaltenböck, G. (2013). The development of comment clauses. In B. Aarts, J. Close, G. Leech, & S. Wallis (Eds.), The verb phrase in English (pp. 286–317). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015). Processibility. In K. Aijmer & C. Rühlemann (Eds.), Corpus Pragmatics (pp. 117–142). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lauwers, P., & Duée, C. (2011). From aspect to evidentiality: The subjectification path of the French semi-copula se faire and its Spanish cognate hacerse . Journal of Pragmatics, 43(4), 1042–1060. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lazard, G. (1999). Mirativity, evidentiality, mediativity, or other? Linguistic Typology, 3(1), 91–109. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
López-Couso, M. J., & Méndez-Naya, B. (2014). Epistemic parentheticals with seem: Late Modern English in focus. In M. Hundt (Ed.), The syntax of Late Modern English (pp. 291–308). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015). Evidential/epistemic markers of the type verb + complementizer: Some parallels from English and Romance. In A. D. M. Smith, G. Trousdale, & R. Waltereit (Eds.), New directions in grammaticalization research (pp. 93–120). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Olbertz, H. (2009). Mirativity and exclamatives in functional discourse grammar: Evidence from Spanish. In E. Keizer & G. Wanders (Eds.), The London papers I [Special issue]. Web Papers in Functional Discourse Grammar, 821, 66–82. [URL] (January 30, 2016)
(2012). The place of exclamatives and miratives in grammar: A functional discourse grammar view. Linguística, 8(1), 76–98.Google Scholar
Petré, P. (2012). General productivity: How become waxed and wax became a copula. Cognitive Linguistics, 23(1), 27–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Rivero, M. L. (2014). Spanish inferential and mirative futures and conditionals: An evidential gradable modal proposal. Lingua, 151(B), 197–215. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Serrano-Losada, M. (2017). On English turn out and Spanish resultar mirative constructions: A case of ongoing grammaticalization? Journal of Historical Linguistics, 7(1/2).160–189.
Squartini, M. (2001). The internal structure of evidentiality. Studies in Language, 25(2), 297–334. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2004). Disentangling evidentiality and epistemic modality in Romance. Lingua, 114(7), 873–895. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, E. C. (1989). On the rise of epistemic meanings in English: An example of subjectification in semantic change. Language, 65(1), 31–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1997). Subjectification and the development of epistemic meaning: The case of promise and threaten . In T. Swan & O. J. Westvik (Eds.), Modality in Germanic languages: Historical and comparative perspectives (pp. 185–210). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2003). From subjectification to intersubjectification. In R. Hickey (Ed.), Motives for language change (pp. 124–139). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tyler, A., & Evans, V. (2003). The semantics of English prepositions: Spatial scenes, embodied meaning and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Bogaert, J. (2011). I think and other complement-taking mental predicates: A case of and for constructional grammaticalization. Linguistics, 49(2), 295–332. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Visser, F. T. (1963). An historical syntax of the English language: Syntactical units with one verb (Vol. 11). Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Willett, T. (1988). A cross-linguistic survey of the grammaticization of evidentiality. Studies in Language, 12(1), 51–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Choi, Soonja, Florian Goller, Ulrich Ansorge, Upyong Hong & Hongoak Yun
2022. Lexical expressions and grammatical markers for source of information: A contrast between German and Korean. Language Sciences 92 ► pp. 101475 ff. DOI logo
Gentens, Caroline
2022. Parenthetical clauses and speech reporting: the case of shriek. Language Sciences 90 ► pp. 101460 ff. DOI logo
Serrano-Losada, Mario
2017. On Englishturn outand Spanishresultarmirative constructions. Journal of Historical Linguistics 7:1-2 ► pp. 160 ff. DOI logo
SERRANO-LOSADA, MARIO
2020. Analogy-driven change: the emergence and development of mirativeend upconstructions in American English. English Language and Linguistics 24:1 ► pp. 97 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 16 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.