Cover not available
Part of
Corpus-based Approaches to Register Variation
Edited by Elena Seoane and Douglas Biber
[Studies in Corpus Linguistics 103] 2021
► pp. 259–290

Chapter 10
Nominalizations in Early Modern English

A cross-register perspective

| University of Oviedo

This chapter explores word-based nominalizations in Early Modern English, a crucial period in the expansion of the English vocabulary. Nine Romance and native suffixes are traced in eighteen registers, thus covering a wide variety of registers along the formal-informal and speech-written continua. Findings demonstrate that there is a strong correlation between informal, speech-related registers and a low frequency of nominalizations, although the communicative purpose of particular registers can also have an effect here. Suffix productivity is also addressed, with results showing that, the frequency of nominalizations in terms of types and tokens increases over time across registers, except trial proceedings. However, Romance suffixes are seen chiefly responsible for this, whereas most native suffixes lose productivity during the period.

Keywords: nominalizations, Early Modern English, register variation, productivity, suffixes, derivational morphology, standardization, vernacularization
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Sources and methodology
  • 3.Results
    • 3.1Overall distribution of nominalization across registers
    • 3.2Diachronic distribution of nominalizations across registers
    • 3.3Suffix productivity diachronically
  • 4.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 8 December 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.103.10rod
References
Anderson, Karen
2000 Productivity in English Nominal and Adjectival Derivation, 1100–2000. PhD dissertation, University of Western Australia.Google Scholar
ARCHER = A Representative Corpus of Historical English Registers
1990–1993/2002/2007/2010/2013 Originally compiled under the supervision of Douglas Biber & Edward Finegan at Northern Arizona University and University of Southern California. Modified and expanded by subsequent members of a consortium of universities. Current member universities are Northern Arizona, Southern California, Freiburg, Heidelberg, Helsinki, Uppsala, Michigan, Manchester, Lancaster, Bamberg, Zurich, Trier, Salford, and Santiago de Compostela. [URL]
Aronoff, Mark
1976 Word Formation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Atkinson, Dwight
1999 Scientific Discourse in Sociohistorical Context. The Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 1675–1975. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Baayen, Harald
1989 A Corpus-Based Approach to Morphological Productivity. Statistical Analysis and Psycho-Linguistic Interpretation. PhD dissertation, Free University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
1992 Quantitative aspects of morphological productivity. In Yearbook of Morphology 1991, Geert Booij & Jaap Van Marle (eds), 109–149. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 Analyzing Linguistic Data. A Practical Introduction to Statistics Using R. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009 Corpus linguistics in morphology: Morphological productivity. In Corpus Linguistics: An International Handbook, Anke Lüdeling & Merja Kytö (eds), 899–919. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Banks, David
2005 On the historical origins of nominalized process in scientific text. English for Specific Purposes 24: 347–357. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bator, Magdalena
2006 Scandinavian loanwords in English in the 15th century. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia. An International Review of English Studies 42: 285–299.Google Scholar
Bauer, Laurie
2001 Morphological Productivity. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beal, Joan C.
2004 English in Modern Times: 1700–1945. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Bhatia, Vijay K.
1993 Analyzing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas
1986 Spoken and written textual dimensions in English: Resolving the contradictory findings. Language 62: 384–414. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1988 Variation Across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001 Dimensions of variation among eighteenth-century speech-based and written registers. In Towards a History of English as a History of Genres, Hans-Jürgen Diller & Manfred Görlach (eds), 89–109. Heidelberg: C. Winter.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas & Conrad, Susan
2019 Register, Genre, and Style, 2nd edn. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas & Finegan, Edward
1989 Drift and the evolution of English style: A history of three genres. Language 65(3): 487–517. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1992 The linguistic evolution of five written and speech-based genres from the seventeenth to the twentieth centuries. In History of Englishes: New Methods and Interpretations in Historical Linguistics, Matti Rissanen, Ossi Ihalainen, Terttu Nevalainen & Irma Taavitsainen (eds), 688–704. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1997 Diachronic relations among speech-based and written registers in English. In To Explain the Present: Studies in the Changing English Language in Honour of Matti Rissanen, Terttu Nevalainen & Leena Kahlas-Tarkka (eds), 253–275. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas & Gray, Bethany
2013 Being specific about historical change: The influence of sub-register. Journal of English Linguistics 41: 104–134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan & Finegan, Edward
1999 Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Brown, Penelope & Levinson, Stephen C.
1987 Politeness. Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ciszek, Ewa
2008 Word Derivation in Early Middle English. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Claridge, Claudia
2012 Linguistic levels: Styles, registers, genres, text types. In English Historical Linguistics. An International Handbook, Vol. 1, Alexander Bergs & Laurel J. Brinton (eds), 237–253. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Claridge, Claudia & Wilson, Andrew
2002 Style evolution in the English sermon. In Sounds, Words, Texts and Change. Selected Papers from 11 ICEHL, Santiago de Compostela, 7–11 September 2000 [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 224], Teresa Fanego, Belén Méndez-Naya & Elena Seoane (eds), 25–44. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cowie, Claire
1998 Diachronic Word-formation: A Corpus-Based Study of Derived Nominalizations in the History of English. PhD dissertation, University of Cambridge.
Cowie, Claire & Dalton-Puffer, Christiane
2002 Diachronic word-formation and studying changes in productivity over time: Theoretical and methodological considerations. In A Changing World of Words. Studies in English Historical Lexicography, Lexicology and Semantics, Javier Díaz-Vera (ed.), 410–437. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Crystal, David & Davy, Derek
1969 Investigating English Style. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan & Kytö, Merja
2010 Early Modern English Dialogues. Spoken Interaction as Writing. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Dalton-Puffer, Christiane
1996 The French Influence on Middle English Morphology: A Corpus-based Study of Derivation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dekeyser, Xavier
1986 Romance loans in Middle English: A re-assessment. In Linguistics across Historical and Geographical Boundaries. In Honour of Jacek Fisiak on the Occasion of his Fiftieth Birthday, Vol. I: Linguistic Theory and Historical Linguistics, Dieter Kastovsky & Alexander Szwedek (eds), 253–265. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Diller, Hans-Jürgen
2001 Genre in linguistic and related discourses. In Towards a History of English as a History of Genres, Hans-Jürgen Diller & Manfred Görlach (eds), 3–43. Heidelberg: C. Winter.Google Scholar
Di Renzo Villata, Maria Gigliola
2007 Legal English. Padova: Cedam.Google Scholar
Durkin, Philip
2008 Latin loanwords of the early modern period: How often did French act as an intermediary? In English Historical Linguistics. Selected papers from the Fourteenth International Conference on English Historical Linguistics (ICEHL 14), Bergamo, 21-25 August 2006. Vol. II. Lexical and Semantic Change, Richard Drury, Maurizio Gotti and Marina Dossena (eds), 185–202. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
2009 The Oxford Guide to Etymology. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Fanego, Teresa, Rodríguez-Puente, Paula, López-Couso, María José, Méndez-Naya, Belén, Núñez-Pertejo, Paloma, Blanco-García, Cristina & Tamaredo, Iván
2017 The Corpus of Historical English Law Reports 1535–1999 (CHELAR): A resource for analysing the development of English legal discourse. ICAME Journal 41: 53–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gardner, Anne-Christine
2014 Derivation in Middle English: Regional and Text Type Variation. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.Google Scholar
Görlach, Manfred
1999 English in Nineteenth-century England. An Introduction. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001 Eighteenth-century English. Heidelberg: C. Winter.Google Scholar
Goźdź-Roszkowski, Stanisƚaw
2011 Patterns of Linguistic Variation in American Legal English. A Corpus-based Study. Bern: Peter Lang. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gray, Bethany & Egbert, Jesse
2019 Register and register variation. Register Studies 1(1): 1–9. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, Michael Alexander Kirkwood
2004 [1988] The language of physical science. In The Language of Science [Collected Works of M.A.K. Halliday Vol. 5], Jonathan J. Webster (ed.), 140–158. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael Alexander Kirkwood & Martin, James R.
1993 Writing Science. Literary and Discursive Power. London: The Falmer Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael Alexander Kirkwood & Matthiessen, Christian
2004 An Introduction to Functional Grammar, 3rd edn. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Haugen, Einar
1966 Dialect, language, nation. American Anthropologist, New Series 68(4): 922–935. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hilpert, Martin
2013 Constructional Change in English: Developments in Allomorphy, Word Formation and Syntax. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huber, Magnus
2007 The Old Bailey Proceedings, 1764–1834. Evaluating and annotating a corpus of 18th- and 19th-century spoken English. In Annotating Variation and Change [Studies in Variation, Contacts and Change in English 1], Anneli Meurman-Solin & Arja Nurmi (eds). Helsinki: University of Helsinki. [URL]> (27 May 2021).
Kaunisto, Mark
2007 Variation and Change in the Lexicon: A Corpus-based Analysis of Adjectives in English Ending in -ic and -ical. Amsterdam: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kroch, Anthony, Santorini, Beatrice & Delfs, Lauren
2004 Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Early Modern English.Google Scholar
Kytö, Merja & Culpeper, Jonathan
2006 A Corpus of English Dialogues 1560–1760. [URL]> (27 May 2021).
Kytö, Merja & Walker, Terry
2006 Guide to a Corpus of English Dialogues 1560–1760. Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.Google Scholar
Lee, David Y. W.
2001 Genres, registers, text types, domains, and styles: Clarifying the concepts and navigating a path through the BNC jungle. Language Learning and Technology 5(3): 37–72.Google Scholar
Lloyd, Cynthia
2011 Semantics and Word Formation. The Semantic Development of Five French Suffixes in Middle English. Bern: Peter Lang. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matras, Yaron
2009 Language Contact. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mattiello, Elisa
2010 Nominalization in English and Italian normative legal texts. ESP Across Cultures 7: 129–146.Google Scholar
McIntosh, Carey
1998 The Evolution of English Prose 1700–1900: Style, Politeness, and Print Culture. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moskowich-Spiegel Fandiño, Isabel
1995 Language contact and language change: The Danes in England. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses 8: 139–153. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Myers, Greg
1990 Writing Biology: Texts in the Social Construction of Scientific Knowledge. Madison WI: The University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu
1999 Early Modern English lexis and semantics. The Cambridge History of the English Language, Vol. III: 1476–1776, Roger Lass (ed.), 332–458. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu & Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena
1994 Its strength and the beauty of it: The standardization of the third person neuter possessive in Early Modern English. In Towards a Standard English: Processes of Selection in Syntax and Morphology, Dieter Stein & Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade (eds), 171–216. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2003 Historical Sociolinguistics. Language Change in Tudor and Stuart England. London: Longman.Google Scholar
2011 Helsinki Corpus. Period division: Early Modern English. [URL]> (16 February 2019).
Nevalainen, Terttu & Tieken-Boon van Ostade, Ingrid
2006 Standardisation. In A History of the English Language, Richard Hogg & David Denison (eds), 271–311. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oxford English Dictionary
, online edn. [URL]> (27 May 2021).
Palmer, Chris C.
2009 Borrowings, Derivational Morphology, and Perceived Productivity in English, 1300–1600. PhD dissertation, The University of Michigan.Google Scholar
2015 Measuring productivity diachronically: Nominal suffixes in English letters, 1400–1600. English Language and Linguistics 19(1): 107–129. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Plag, Ingo
1999 Morphological Productivity: Structural Constraints in English Derivation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2003 Word-formation in English. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Plag, Ingo, Dalton-Puffer, Christiane & Baayen, Harald
1999 Morphological productivity across speech and writing. English Language and Linguistics 3(2): 209–228. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
R Core Team
2020 R version 3.6.3. A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. [URL]> (27 May 2021).
Riddle, Elizabeth M.
1985 A historical perspective on the productivity of the suffixes -ness and -ity. In Historical Semantics, Historical Word-Formation, Jacek Fisiak (ed.), 435–461. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rodríguez-Puente, Paula
2019 Interpersonality in legal written discourse. A diachronic analysis of personal pronouns in law reports, 1535 to present. In Corpus-based Research on Variation in English Legal Discourse [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 91], Teresa Fanego & Paula Rodríguez-Puente (eds), 171–199. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2020 Register variation in word-formation processes: The development of -ity and -ness in Early Modern English. International Journal of English Studies 20(2) 147–169. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rodríguez-Puente, Paula, Fanego, Teresa, López-Couso, María José, Méndez-Naya, Belén, Núñez-Pertejo, Paloma, Blanco-García, Cristina & Tamaredo, Iván
2018 Corpus of Historical English Law Reports 1535–1999 (CHELAR), v.2. [URL]> (27 May 2021).
Romaine, Suzanne
1998 Introduction. In The Cambridge History of the English Language, Vol. IV: 1776–1997, Suzanne Romaine (ed.), 1–56. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Romero-Barranco, Jesús
2020 A comparison of some French and English nominal suffixes in early English correspondence. In Multilingual Origins of Standard English, Laura Wright (ed.), 467–486. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rothwell, William
1996 The Anglo-French element in the vulgar register of Late Middle English. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 5: 423–436.Google Scholar
Säily, Tanja
2014 Sociolinguistic Variation in English Derivational Productivity. Studies and Methods in Diachronic Corpus Linguistics. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.Google Scholar
Säily, Tanja & Suomela, Jukka
2009 Comparing type counts: The case of women, men and -ity in early English letters. In Corpus Linguistics: Refinements and Reassessments, Antoinette Renouf & Andrew Kehoe (eds), 87–109. Amsterdam: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sánchez-Febrero, José Luis
2003 Legal English and Translation: Theory and Practice. Annotated Texts and Documents. Alicante: Editorial Club Universitario.Google Scholar
Schneider, Edgar W.
1985 Variability in word formation patterns and productivity in the history of English. In Papers from the 6th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 34], Jacek Fisiak (ed.), 451–465. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scott, Mike
2012 WordSmith Tools, Version 6. Stroud: Lexical Analysis Software.Google Scholar
Suomela, Jukka
2016 Types2: Type and Hapax Accumulation Curves [Computer program]. [URL]> (27 May 2021)
Taavitsainen, Irma
2016 Genre dynamics in the history of English. In The Cambridge Handbook of English Historical Linguistics, Merja Kytö and Päivi Pahta (eds), 271–285. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tiersma, Peter M.
1999 Legal Language. Chicago IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Trips, Carola
2009 Lexical Semantics and Diachronic Morphology: The Development of -hood, -doom and -ship in the History of English. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tyrkkö, Jukka & Hiltunen, Turo
2009 Frequency of nominalization in Early Modern English medical writing. In Corpora: Pragmatics and Discourse, Andreas Jucker, Daniel Schreier & Marianne Hundt (eds), 297–320. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Ventola, Eija
1996 Packing and unpacking of information in academic texts. In Academic Writing. Intercultural and Textual Issues, Eija Ventola & Anna Mauranen (eds), 153–194. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Williams, Christopher
2004 Legal English and plain language: An introduction. ESP Across Cultures 1: 111–124.Google Scholar