Article published in:Corpus Interrogation and Grammatical Patterns
Edited by Kristin Davidse, Caroline Gentens, Lobke Ghesquière and Lieven Vandelanotte
[Studies in Corpus Linguistics 63] 2014
► pp. 131–149
Syntactic constraints on the use of dual form intensifiers in Modern English
Recent work on comparative variation has highlighted two major syntactic environments encouraging the choice of the more explicit more-variant, a) the use of non-attributive rather than attributive adjectives and b) the use of complemented rather than uncomplemented (non-attributive) adjectives (cf., e.g., Mondorf 2009). The present article shows that throughout the Modern English period these environments have also favoured the choice of the more explicit suffixed variant in dual form intensifiers. In addition, the paper briefly assesses some important theories that have been or could be invoked to account for these findings. Specifically, it is shown that the prosodic (sub)type of the intensifier itself does not play a decisive role in selecting the suffixed or suffixless variant.
Published online: 14 November 2014
Rohdenburg, G. & Schlüter, J.
2002 Morphology recycled: The principle of rhythmic alternation at work in Early and Late Modern English grammatical variation. In English Historical Syntax and Morphology. Selected Papers from 11 ICEHL, Santiago de Compostela, 7–11 September 2000 [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 223], T. Fanego, J. Pérez-Guerra & M.J. López-Couso (eds), 255–281. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Tagliamonte, S. & Ito, R.