Cover not available
Article published In:
Studies in Language
Vol. 40:1 (2016) ► pp.26–62

The road already traveled

Constructional analogy in lexico-syntactic change

Usage-based models of language have proposed a dynamic, organized system based on analogy, or the recognition of similarity. The potential role of analogy between similar forms or constructions, however, is not often discussed. If we aim to illustrate grammaticalization and other diachronic processes not through one construction at a time — but by quantitatively assessing the relationship between constructions — we may better address the role of analogy as a mechanism of change. This quantitative, diachronic, corpus-based examination of language-internal constructional analogy is based on four forms in Spanish: altamente ‘highly’, enormemente ‘enormously’, extraordinariamente ‘extraordinarily’, and extremadamente ‘extremely’. These forms all occur in at least two basic constructions, in which they function as modifiers of verbs and as modifiers of modifiers. Analogical “transference” of paths of change between forms is proposed as a cross-linguistic language-internal process. Not only do forms compete with each other, but they also may borrow the path another has taken.
Keywords: analogy, constructions, intensifiers, language change, Spanish
Published online: 29 April 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.40.1.02aar
References (89)
Aaron, Jessi Elana. 2010. Pushing the envelope: Looking beyond the variable context. Language Variation and Change 22(1). 1–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aitchison, Jean. 1991. Language change: Progress or decay? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Altenberg, Bengt. 1991. Amplifier collocations in spoken English. In Stig Jihansson & Anna-Brita Stenström (eds.), English computer corpora: Selected papers and research guide, 127–147. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Anscombre, Jean-Claude. 2009. Des adverbes d’énonciation aux marqueurs d’attitude énonciative: Le cas de la construction tout + Adjectif. Langue Française 1611. 59–80. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Arce Castillo, Angela. 1999. Intensificadores en español coloquial. Anuario de Estudios Filológicos 221. 37–48.Google Scholar
Arjona, Marina. 1990. El adverbio muy y otros intensificadores en el habla popular de México. Anuario de Letras 281. 75–96.Google Scholar
Axenti, Eufrosinia. 2002. El papel de la polisemia de unas estructuras morfosintácticas en el campo semántico-funcional de la intensidad absoluta. Estudios de Lingüística 161. 385–389.Google Scholar
Bäcklund, Ulf. 1973. The collocation of adverbs of degree in English. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Barbieri, Federica. 2008. Patterns of age-based linguistic variation in American English. Journal of Sociolinguistics 12(1). 58–88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berg, Thomas. 1998. Linguistic structure and change: An explanation from language processing. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight L. 1972. Degree words. The Hague and Paris: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Borst, Eugene. 1902. Die Gradadverbien im Englischen (Anglistische Forschungen 10). Heidelberg: Carl Winter’s Universitätsbuchhandlung.Google Scholar
Boye, Kasper & Peter Harder. 2012. A usage-based theory of grammatical status and grammaticalization. Language 88(1). 1–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bradac, J., A. Mulac & S. Thompson. 1995. Men’s and women’s use of intensifiers and hedges in problem-solving interaction: Molar and molecular analyses. Research on Language & Social Interaction 28(2). 93–116. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Brown, Esther & Mayra Cortés-Torres. 2013. Puerto Rican intensifiers: Bien/muy variables. In Ana M. Carvalho & Sara Beaudrie (eds.), Selected Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on Spanish Sociolinguistics, 1–19. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan. 2010. Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2003. Mechanisms of change in grammaticization: The role of frequency. In Brian Joseph & Richard Janda (eds.), Handbook of historical linguistics, 602–623. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan & John L. McClelland. 2005. Alternatives to the combinatorial paradigm of linguistic theory based on domain general principles of human cognition. The Linguistic Review 221. 381–410. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan & Dan I. Slobin. 1982. Rules and schemas in the development and use of the English past tense. Language 581. 265–289. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cegala, D.J. 1989. A study of selected linguistic components of involvement in interaction. Western Journal of Speech Communication 531. 311–326. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Cesare, Anna-Maria. 2003. Una funzione del tutto particolare, quella di assolutamente e simili. Revue Romane 38(2). 179–214.Google Scholar
De Smet, Hendrik. 2012a. The course of actualization. Language 88(3). 601–633. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012b. Spreading patterns: Diffusional change in the English system of complementation. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Defour, Tine. 2012. The pragmaticalization and intensification of verily, truly and really: A corpus-based study on the developments of three truth-identifying adverbs. In Manfred Markus, Yoko Iyeiri, Reinhard Heuberger & Emil Chamson (eds.), Middle and Modern English corpus linguistics: A multi-dimensional approach, 75–92. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dixon, R.M.W. 1977. Where have all the adjectives gone? Studies in Language 1(1). 19–80. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fettig, Adolf. 1934. Die Gradadverbien im Mittelenglischen (Anglistische Forschungen 79). Heidelberg: Carl Winter’s Universitätsbuchhandlung.Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga. 2007. Morphosyntactic change: Formal and functional perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fuentes Rodríguez, C. 2008. Operadores de intensificación del adjetivo: Cantidad y evaluación. RILCE: Revista de filología hispánica 24(1). 1–24.Google Scholar
Gaarder, A.B. 1966. Los llamados diminutivos y aumentativos en el español de México. PMLA 81(7). 585–595. [URL]. (8 Dec 2015). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
García Z.C. & A.C. Muñoz. 1997. Morfosintaxis de “la exageración” en el habla coloquial antioqueña. Lingüística y Literatura 18(32). 115–128.Google Scholar
Giancole Ramat, Anna & Caterina Mauri. 2012. Gradualness and pace in grammaticalization: The case of adversative connectives. Folia Linguistica 4621. 483–512. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Givón, Talmy. 1991. The evolution of dependent clause morpho-syntax in Biblical Hebrew. In Elizabeth Closs Traugott & Bernd Heine (eds.), Approaches to Grammaticalization Volume II1, 257–310. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E. 2006. Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
González-Díaz, V. 2008. Recent developments in English intensifiers: The case of very much . English Language and Linguistics 12(02). 221–243. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haiman, John. 1994. Ritualization and the development of language. In William Pagliuca (ed.), Perspectives on grammaticalization, 3–28. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd & Tania Kuteva. 2003. On contact-induced grammaticalization. Studies in Language 27(3). 529–572. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hopper, Paul & Elizabeth Closs Traugott. 2003. Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hosman, L.A. 2006. Powerful and powerless language forms: Their consequences for impression formation, attributions of control of self and control of others, cognitive responses, and message memory. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 25(1). 33–46. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney. 1975. Review: Degree words. Journal of Linguistics 11(2). 316–319. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney & Geoffrey K. Pullum et al. (2002). The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ito, R. & S. Tagliamonte. 2003. Well weird, right dodgy, very strange, really cool: Layering and recycling in English intensifiers. Language in Society 32(2). 257–279. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kastovsky, D. 1976. Review: Intensification and semantic analysis. Foundations of Language 14(3). 377–398.Google Scholar
Kennedy, G. 2003. Amplifier collocations in the British National Corpus: Implications for English language teaching. TESOL Quarterly 37(3). 467–487. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klein, H. 1998. Adverbs of degree in Dutch and related languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuha, M. 2005. Investigating the Spread of “so” as an intensifier: Social and structural factors. In Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual Symposium about Language and Society – Austin April 16-18, 2004, 217–227. Texas Linguistic Forum. [URL]. (8 Dec 2015).Google Scholar
Lakoff, Robin. 1973. Language and woman’s place. Language in Society 21. 45–80. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1975. Language and woman’s place. New York, NY: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
. 1990. Talking power. New York, NY: Basic.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 2000. A dynamic usage-based model. In Michael Barlow & Suzanne Kemmer (eds.), Usage-based models of language, 1–63. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Lenker, Ursula. 2008. Booster prefixes in Old English – an alternative view of the roots of ME forsooth . English Language and Linguistics 12(02). 245–265. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Labov, William. 1984. Intensity. In Deborah Schiffrin (ed.), Meaning, form and use in context: Linguistic applications, 43–70. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Lorenz, Gunter. 1999. Adjective intensification—learners versus native speakers: A corpus study of argumentative writing. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Macaulay, R. 2006. Pure grammaticalization: The development of a teenage intensifier. Language Variation and Change 18(3). 267–283. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mancera Rueda, A. 2009. Una aproximación al estudio de los procedimientos de intensificación presentes en el discurso periodístico. Revista de Estudios Filológicos 171. [URL]. (8 Dec 2015).Google Scholar
Mehedindţi, T.S. 2013. El español coloquial: La expresión del valor superlativo. Annals of “Dimitrie Cantemir” Christian University: Linguistics, Literature and Methodology of Teaching 12(1). 53–63. [URL]. (8 Dec 2015).Google Scholar
Méndez-Naya, Belén. 2008a. Special issue on English intensifiers. English Language and Linguistics 12(2). 213–219. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2008b. On the history of downright . English Language and Linguistics 12(2). 267–287. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Murphy, Bróna. 2010. Corpus and sociolinguistics: Investigating age and gender in female talk. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nevalainen, T. 2008. Social variation in intensifier use: Constraint on -ly adverbialization in the past? English Language and Linguistics 12(2). 289–315. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Barr, W.M. 1982. Linguistic evidence: Language, power, and strategy in the courtroom. New York, NY: Academic.Google Scholar
Ogura, Mieko & William S.-Y. Wang. 1996. Snowball effect in lexical diffusion: The development of -s in the third person singular present indicative in English. In Derek Britton (ed.), English historical linguistics, 119–141. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pahta, P. 2006a. This is very important: A corpus study of amplifiers in medical writing. In M. Gotti & F. Salager-Meyer F. (eds.), Advances in medical discourse analysis: Oral and written contexts, 357–381. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
. 2006b. Ful holsum and profetable for the bodi: A corpus study of amplifiers in Medieval English medical texts. Diachronic Perspectives on Domain-specific English 401. 207–228.Google Scholar
Paradis, Carita. 2000. It’s well weird: Degree modifiers of adjectives revisited: The nineties. In John M. Kirk (ed.), Corpora galore: Analyses and techniques in describing English, 147–160. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
. 2008. Configurations, construals and change: Expressions of DEGREE. English Language and Linguistics 12(02). 317–343. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pelkey, Jamin. 2013. Analogy, automation and diagrammatic causation: The evolution of Tibeto-Burman *lak*. Studies in Language 37(1). 144–195. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peters, Hans. 1994. Degree adverbs in Early Modern English. In Dieter Kastovsky (ed.), Studies in early Modern English, 269–288. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Poplack, Shana & Elisabete Malvar. 2007. Elucidating the transition period in linguistic change: The expression of the future in Brazilian Portuguese. Probus 19(1). 121–169. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, & Jan Svartvik. 1972. A grammar of contemporary English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Rissanen, M. 2008. From ‘quickly’ to ‘fairly’: on the history of rather . English Language and Linguistics 12(02). 345–359. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Salazar-García, V. 2008. Degree words, intensification, and word class distinctions in Romance languages. Studies in Language 32(3). 701–726. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sancho Cremades, P. 2008. La sintaxis de algunas construcciones intensificadoras en español y en catalán coloquiales. Verba 351. 199–233.Google Scholar
Sawada, O. 2010. Pragmatic aspects of scalar modifiers. Chicago: University of Chicago PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Serradilla Castaño, Ana. 2006. Bien + adjectivo como perífrasis de superlativo en español: Particularidades semánticas y sintácticas. Verba 331. 215–233.Google Scholar
Sowa, J. 2009. “Sweet as!”: The intensifier as in New Zealand and Australian English. English Today 25(02). 58. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stenström, Anna-Brita. 1987. What does really really do? In James Monaghan (ed.), Grammar in the construction of texts, 65–79. London: Frances Pinter.Google Scholar
. 1999. He was really gormless—she’s bloody crap: Girls, boys and intensifiers. In Hilde Hasselgård & Signe Oksefjell (eds.), Out of corpora: Studies in honour of Stig Johansson, 69–78. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
. 2000. It’s enough funny, man: Intensifiers in teenage talk. In John M. Kirk (ed.), Corpora galore: Analyses and techniques in describing English, 177–190. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Stoffel, Cornelis. 1901. Intensives and downtoners (Anglistische Forchungen 1). Heidelberg: Carl Winter’s Universitätsbuchhandlung.Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, S.A. 2008. So different and pretty cool! Recycling intensifiers in Toronto, Canada. English Language and Linguistics 12(2). 361–394. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tanghe, S. 2013. Acerca de los intensificadores vaya y qué: Un estudio comparativo. Bulletin of Hispanic Studies 90(7). 751–770. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Torres Cacoullos, Rena. 2002. Le: From pronoun to intensifier. Linguistics 40(2). 285–318.Google Scholar
Torres Cacoullos, Rena & James A. Walker. 2009. The present of the English future: Grammatical variation and collocations in discourse. Language 85(2). 321–354. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2008. Grammaticalization, constructions and the incremental development of language: Suggestions from the development of degree modifiers in English. In Regine Eckardt, Gerhard Jäger, & Tonjes Veenstra (eds.), Variation, selection, development—Probing the evolutionary model of language change, 219–250. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Graeme Trousdale. 2010. Gradience, gradualness and grammaticalization: How do they intersect? In Elizabeth Closs Traugott & Graeme Trousdale (eds.), Gradience, gradualness and grammaticalization, 19–44. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trousdale, Graeme. 2012. Grammaticalization, constructions and the grammaticalization of constructions. In Kristin Davidse, Tine Breban, Lieselotte Brems, & Tanja Mortelmans (eds.), Grammaticalization and language change: New reflections, 167–198. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tsujimura, N. 2001. Degree words and scalar structure in Japanese. Lingua 111(1). 29–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Warner, Antony. 1993. English auxiliaries: Structure and history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Abella Fernandez, Tania
2022. When Planning Means No Plan: Bidirectional Subjectification in Peninsular Spanish en plan– From Adverbial Phrase to Discourse Marker Functions. Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics 15:2 ► pp. 255 ff. DOI logo
Flórez, Carmen Fernández
2022. The use of the intensifierbienamong bilinguals in Southern Arizona Spanish and its grammaticalization process. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics 35:1 ► pp. 120 ff. DOI logo
De Troij, Robbert & Freek Van de Velde
2020. Beyond Mere Text Frequency: Assessing Subtle Grammaticalization by Different Quantitative Measures. A Case Study on the Dutch Soort Construction. Languages 5:4 ► pp. 55 ff. DOI logo
Smet, Hendrik De, Frauke D’hoedt, Lauren Fonteyn & Kristel Van Goethem
2018. The changing functions of competing forms: Attraction and differentiation. Cognitive Linguistics 29:2 ► pp. 197 ff. DOI logo
Kanwit, Matthew, Virginia Terán & Silvia Pisabarro Sarrió
2017. Un fenómeno bien curioso: New methods for analyzing variable intensification across four dialects of Spain and Argentina. Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics 10:2 ► pp. 259 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 september 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.