219-7677 10 7500817 John Benjamins Publishing Company Marketing Department / Karin Plijnaar, Pieter Lamers onix@benjamins.nl 201608250353 ONIX title feed eng 01 EUR
767014992 03 01 01 JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 JB code SLCS 162 Eb 15 9789027269720 06 10.1075/slcs.162 13 2014022645 DG 002 02 01 SLCS 02 0165-7763 Studies in Language Companion Series 162 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Grammaticalization – Theory and Data</TitleText> 01 slcs.162 01 https://benjamins.com 02 https://benjamins.com/catalog/slcs.162 1 B01 Sylvie Hancil Hancil, Sylvie Sylvie Hancil University of Rouen 2 B01 Ekkehard König König, Ekkehard Ekkehard König Free University Berlin 01 eng 301 viii 293 LAN009000 v.2006 CFF 2 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.HL Historical linguistics 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.MORPH Morphology 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.SYNTAX Syntax 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.THEOR Theoretical linguistics 06 01 Since the 1980s theories and studies of grammaticalization have provided a major source of inspiration for the description and explanation of language change, giving rise to many publications and conferences. This collection presents original, empirical studies that explore various facets of grammaticalization research of both formal and functional orientation. The papers of this selection deal with general issues and specific empirical domains, such as personal pronouns; indefinite pronouns; final particles; tense and aspect markers; comitative markers and coordinating conjunctions. The languages covered include English, German, dialects of Italian, Japanese, Polish, and Walman (Papuan). The book will be of great interest to linguists working on language change in a wide variety of languages. 04 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475/slcs.162.png 04 03 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027259271.jpg 04 03 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027259271.tif 06 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/slcs.162.hb.png 07 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/125/slcs.162.png 25 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/slcs.162.hb.png 27 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/slcs.162.hb.png 10 01 JB code slcs.162.001ack vii viii 2 Article 1 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Acknowledgements</TitleText> 10 01 JB code slcs.162.01int 1 10 10 Article 2 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Introduction</TitleText> 1 A01 Sylvie Hancil Hancil, Sylvie Sylvie Hancil 2 A01 Ekkehard König König, Ekkehard Ekkehard König 10 01 JB code slcs.162.s1 Section header 3 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Part 1. General issues</TitleText> 10 01 JB code slcs.162.02oeh 13 40 28 Article 4 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Acquisition Based and Usage Based Explanations of Grammaticalisation. An Integrative Approach</TitleText> 1 A01 Peter Öhl Öhl, Peter Peter Öhl 01 This paper compares and discusses two mainstream explanations of grammaticalisation processes: Generative accounts regarding them as reflections of structural reanalysis through parametric change during language acquisition, resulting in recategorisation of lexical elements as functional heads in syntactic structure and functionalist approaches that focus on performance, arguing that speakers tend to either improve expressiveness or economise speech production by varying the application of the rules of grammar, which may result in conventionalisation and finally even change the rules of grammar or create new functional elements. Our aim is to integrate the advantages of both approaches. Basically, it is argued that performance-based conventionalisation plays a central role for grammaticalisation by providing the linguistic preconditions for recategorisation of lexical elements as functional ones, or semi-functional elements as fully functional ones. However, changes of the basic rule system of grammar, which includes the parametric representation of functional heads in syntactic structure, cannot be changed except through structural reanalysis during language acquisition. On the other hand, the input for language acquisition is speech, which is shaped by application and, to a certain degree, modification of the functional rules of the grammatical system by the speaker. The part of grammar that is accessible to manipulation by the speaker is called &#8216;fringe-grammar&#8217; in generative theory. Thus the central claim will be: <i>in processes of grammaticalisation, change of the core grammar is often initialised by functional variation at the fringe.</i> The whole process may include several steps of alternate usage-based and acquisition-based changes. This model will be exemplified by its application to the analysis of the development of analytic tenses. 10 01 JB code slcs.162.03app 41 52 12 Article 5 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Grammaticalization and Explanation</TitleText> 1 A01 Irene Appelbaum Appelbaum, Irene Irene Appelbaum 01 A recurring theme in a special issue of <i>Language Sciences </i>(2001)<i> </i>devoted to theoretical debates about grammaticalization is that the causal mechanisms subserving examples of grammaticalization are explanatorily exhaustive and that the concept of grammaticalization itself is therefore empty. The position seems to be a straightforward inference from the assumption that explanation must appeal to causal mechanisms, together with the recognition that grammaticalization is not itself a causal mechanism. While this position is unobjectionable, perhaps even unassailable, in addressing questions of the form <i>How did grammaticalization-examplex occur in languagey&#63; </i>there are other questions that seem to be better addressed by<i> </i>appealing to the concept of grammaticalization itself. In particular, questions of the form <i>What makes language-change-examplex specifically an example of grammaticalization&#63; </i>are best answered by appealing to the fact that it satisfies the concept or definition of grammaticalization. Satisfying the definition of grammaticalization, in turn, requires identifying the language change example specifically as one involving a lexical to grammatical change (or a change from less grammatical to more grammatical), regardless of the causal mechanisms involved in that change. That is, it is only under the description of the phenomenon as a change from lexical form to grammatical form, that the mechanisms typically adduced to explain this change can be said to be explaining it <i>as </i>an instance of grammaticalization. 10 01 JB code slcs.162.04wal 53 66 14 Article 6 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">The perfectivization of the English perfect</TitleText> <TitlePrefix>The </TitlePrefix> <TitleWithoutPrefix textformat="02">perfectivization of the English perfect</TitleWithoutPrefix> <Subtitle textformat="02">is it a case of grammaticalization, after all? The challenge of pluricentrality</Subtitle> 1 A01 Jim Walker Walker, Jim Jim Walker 01 This paper assesses the degree to which the HAVE-perfect in English can truly be thought of as a paradigmatic case of grammaticalization, as has at times been proposed in the literature. By examining the existing scholarship on two proposed recent developments of the HAVE-perfect, its claimed emerging compatibility with definite past time adverbials and its use as a perfective tense to narrate sequences of past-time events, and by proposing new data, the paper demonstrates that it is by no means clear that either of these phenomena are truly emergent, and therefore urges caution in the rush to see grammaticalization afoot. The paper goes on to call for greater caution in theorizing how grammaticalization affects languages, such as English, which are pluricentral and wherein related phenomena may occasionally travel along two clines facing opposite directions. 10 01 JB code slcs.162.05hei 67 86 20 Article 7 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Explaining language structure</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">On categorial misbehavior in Walman (Papua New Guinea)</Subtitle> 1 A01 Bernd Heine Heine, Bernd Bernd Heine 01 Typically, certain grammatical features are associated with one particular lexical category rather than some other category. Nouns can be modified by numerals or adjectives, can take determiners like demonstratives or possessive attributes, can be inflected for number, case, etc. Verbs, by contrast, take markers of tense, aspect, modality and can be negated, etc. But cross-linguistic observations show that one and the same linguistic expression can also be associated with more than one grammatical category. For example, in many languages there are forms that serve the expression of verbal tense or aspect in some of their uses but behave like lexical verbs in other uses; adpositions may be homophonous with nouns, or relative clause markers with demonstratives, etc. In many of these cases, grammaticalization theory has been used to account for such situations.The present paper argues that this framework is also able to explain connections between linguistic structures that appear to be entirely unrelated to one another. Such a case of &#8220;categorial misbehavior&#8221; is reported from the Walman language of Papua New Guinea, where two &#8216;and&#8217;-conjunctions that have the function of conjoining noun phrases have the morphological structure of transitive verbs. Drawing on typological evidence from a number of genetically and areally unrelated languages, the paper proposes a reconstruction of the situation in Walman based on regularities of grammatical change. The main goal of the paper is to argue that grammaticalization theory can provide explanations that appear to be beyond the potential of other linguistic frameworks. Such explanations are external rather than internal, and they are restricted to the question of why languages are structured the way they are, that is, they concern neither the question of how people use their language nor what knowledge they have about their language. 10 01 JB code slcs.162.06tra 87 106 20 Article 8 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Toward a constructional framework for research on language change</TitleText> 1 A01 Elizabeth Closs Traugott Traugott, Elizabeth Closs Elizabeth Closs Traugott 01 Over the past two decades usage-based models of language as a system of form-meaning pairs (&#8216;signs&#8217;) have been developed (e.g. Goldberg 1995, 2006; Croft 2001). These models are known as Construction Grammars. Historical approaches using constructionalist frameworks (e.g. Bergs &#38; Diewald 2008; Bar&#240;dal 2008) have concentrated on accounting for grammatical change. In this paper I present a framework that includes and extends prior work on both grammaticalization and lexicalization (see also Traugott &#38; Trousdale 2013). Because a construction is a sign, the framework requires the researcher to focus on form and meaning equally. Because a construction may be specific or abstract and schematic, each micro-construction can be shown to have its own history within the constraints of larger schemas. Schemas and networks provide a principled way of thinking about analogy. The development of patterns and of changes in productivity are highlighted in constructionalist frameworks. Therefore the focus in this paper is on expansion (see Himmelmann 2004) rather than on the reduction often associated with many earlier models of grammaticalization and lexicalization (e.g. Lehmann 1995; Brinton &#38; Traugott 2005). Expansion and reduction are shown to be intertwined. Therefore unidirectionality has a less prominent theoretical status than is often assigned to it in non-constructionalist models of language change. 10 01 JB code slcs.162.s2 Section header 9 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Part 2. Case studies</TitleText> 10 01 JB code slcs.162.07kok 109 128 20 Article 10 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Grammaticalization of Polish mental predicate prefixes</TitleText> 1 A01 Iwona Kokorniak Kokorniak, Iwona Iwona Kokorniak 2 A01 Malgorzata Fabiszak Fabiszak, Malgorzata Malgorzata Fabiszak 01 This article presents insights into grammaticalization mechanisms in an attempt to elucidate the status of the aspectual prefixes in Polish as semantically &#8216;heavy&#8217; or semantically &#8216;light&#8217;. The verb <i>my&#347;le&#263; </i>&#8216;to think&#8217; and its ten prefixes constitute the subject of investigation. The study employs corpus linguistics as a method and applies a number of tests, also proposing a new one, for identifying the degree of grammaticalization of the individual prefixes. The new test consists in analyzing collocation patterns of the transitive verb in its imperfective form and its perfective counterparts. It shows that the sets of collocates differ between the imperfective and perfective forms with a varying degree of overlap. A higher overlap ratio is interpreted to indicate a higher degree of grammaticalization. 10 01 JB code slcs.162.08shi 129 156 28 Article 11 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">More Thoughts on the Grammaticalization of Personal Pronouns</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">Evidence from the history of Japanese</Subtitle> 1 A01 Reijirou Shibasaki Shibasaki, Reijirou Reijirou Shibasaki 01 The grammatical category of personal pronouns is one of the most researched domains in Japanese as well as in other languages. In fact, works on the genesis and development of Japanese personal pronouns in comparison to those in other languages have been continuously reported long before the notion of grammaticalization was introduced and became an important concept in studies of language change. While preceding studies mostly lay emphasis on the different behaviors between Japanese personal pronouns and the counterparts in European languages, Heine and Song (2010, 2011) exemplify some features common among particular sets of languages i.e. referential shifting between different pronouns, especially from third to second person. As a supplemental survey to Heine and Song (2010, 2011), the present study aims to point out other pathways, especially from first to second person, through which personal pronouns are grammaticalized more in Japanese than in other languages. 10 01 JB code slcs.162.09rus 157 180 24 Article 12 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">The grammaticalization of <i>nom&#601;</i> in the Eastern Abruzzese dialect Ortese</TitleText> <TitlePrefix>The </TitlePrefix> <TitleWithoutPrefix textformat="02">grammaticalization of <i>nom&#601;</i> in the Eastern Abruzzese dialect Ortese</TitleWithoutPrefix> <Subtitle textformat="02">Fromindefinite pronoun to inflectional marker?</Subtitle> 1 A01 Cinzia Russi Russi, Cinzia Cinzia Russi 01 This paper draws attention to the distribution and referential functions <i>nom&#201;&#8482;</i> in Ortonese, an Eastern Abruzzese dialect that, overall, remains relatively understudied. The analysis of original written and spoken data shows that in this dialect <i>nom&#201;&#8482;</i> appears to have reached a more advanced stage of grammaticalization compared to other Eastern Abruzzese dialects (such as Ariellese), given that this element (which has been characterized as an indefinite pronoun), can carry definite referential value and can co-occur with an explicit subject. In Ortonese, then, <i>nom&#201;&#8482;</i> appears to function as a third person plural verbal marker rather than as an (indefinite) pronominal element. With respect to the distribution and range of referential values of <i>nom&#201;&#8482;</i>, Ortonese seems to differ considerably from the neighboring dialect Ariellese (D&#8217;Alessandro &#38; Alexiadou 2006; D&#8217;Alessandro 2010) and, rather, it patterns with the Abruzzese dialects discussed in Manzini and Savoia (2005: 520ff.). 10 01 JB code slcs.162.10rom 181 202 22 Article 13 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">The different developments of progressive aspect markers <i>be in the middle/midst of</i> and <i>be in the process of</i> V-<i>ing</i></TitleText> <TitlePrefix>The </TitlePrefix> <TitleWithoutPrefix textformat="02">different developments of progressive aspect markers <i>be in the middle/midst of</i> and <i>be in the process of</i> V-<i>ing</i></TitleWithoutPrefix> <Subtitle textformat="02">mechanisms of change</Subtitle> 1 A01 Tine Van Rompae Van Rompae, Tine Tine Van Rompae 2 A01 Kristin Davidse Davidse, Kristin Kristin Davidse 01 In this case study, we reconstruct the grammaticalization paths of <i>middle, midst </i>and <i>process</i>, which led to a set of progressive aspect markers (PAMs) in Present-day English. The three PAMs developed from two different source structures, viz. complex prepositions <i>in the middle/midst of </i>&#43; NP and complex appositive noun phrase <i>the process of</i> &#43; NP. The main theoretical aim of the diachronic reconstruction is to identify and characterize the main mechanisms of change that affected the different structures with these nouns on their grammaticalization trajectories: (i) <i>reanalysis</i> in the sense of functional reparsing of an existing structure; (ii) <i>analogization</i>: the attraction of new functional properties to an existing structure; (iii) <i>neo-analysis by analogy</i>: the creation of a functional structure that is new in the item&#8217;s trajectory of change. We also discuss how these mechanisms of change interact with enabling factors such as metaphor and metonymy, collocational fixation, expansion and reclustering, and discursive functions. 10 01 JB code slcs.162.11has 203 234 32 Article 14 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Sequentiality in dialogue as a trigger for grammaticalization</TitleText> 1 A01 Alexander Haselow Haselow, Alexander Alexander Haselow 01 Using the rise of three final particles in spoken English (<i>then</i>, <i>though, anyway</i>) as a case study it will be shown that dialogic interaction is an important domain of grammaticalization. The central idea is that grammaticalization may be induced by the regularization of interactive sequences which, over time, freeze into dialogic schemas and trigger a change of originally lexical or sentence-internal grammatical items involved in such schemas into elements establishing relations beyond the sentence level. The study shows that the proper domain of grammaticalization is not an individual element, but the dialogic context in which it is regularly used. Corpus-based, empirical data are used to document the grammaticalization of the three final particles in different text types within a framework that conceives of grammaticalization as structural and contextual expansion (rather than reduction) and as a functional (rather than formal) change. 10 01 JB code slcs.162.12han 235 256 22 Article 15 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">The final particle <i>but</i> in British English</TitleText> <TitlePrefix>The </TitlePrefix> <TitleWithoutPrefix textformat="02">final particle <i>but</i> in British English</TitleWithoutPrefix> <Subtitle textformat="02">an instance of cooptation and grammaticalization at work</Subtitle> 1 A01 Sylvie Hancil Hancil, Sylvie Sylvie Hancil 01 Even though final <i>but </i>is still a relatively recent phenomenon in British English, it is worth studying in more detail. The purpose of the article is to shed some light on final <i>but</i> in the spoken part of the <i>British National Corpus</i> (BNC) and in the <i>Newcastle Electronic Corpus of Tyneside English </i>(NECTE). The examination of the various semantic-pragmatic meanings shows that they can directly be put along a specific grammaticalization chain and that instead of being explainable in terms of pragmaticalization, they can be better explained in terms of cooptation and grammaticalization. 10 01 JB code slcs.162.13izu 257 286 30 Article 16 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">&#8220;Final hanging but&#8221; in American English</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">Where a formal coordinator meets a functional subordinator</Subtitle> 1 A01 Mitsuko Narita Izutsu Izutsu, Mitsuko Narita Mitsuko Narita Izutsu 2 A01 Katsunobu Izutsu Izutsu, Katsunobu Katsunobu Izutsu 01 Mulder and Thompson (2006, 2008) point out that the final hanging <i>but</i> ([X <i>but</i>]) developed from initial <i>but</i> (X [<i>but</i> Y]) through a sequence of formal reanalyses, and insightfully observe the functional and formal parallelism between the development of the hanging type of final <i>but</i> and the final particalization of the Japanese subordinator -<i>kedo</i>. The present article demonstrates that <i>but</i> (and <i>and</i> as well) can perform a terminal bracketing function and serve as functional subordinators in spoken American English, and that they behave like final particles when the sentences are truncated. Although they are not so final-particalized as Australian final <i>but</i>, their interpersonal functions in final position are edging them closer to the status of final particles in spoken American English. 10 01 JB code slcs.162.14aut 287 288 2 Article 17 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Author index</TitleText> 10 01 JB code slcs.162.15sub 289 294 6 Article 18 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Subject index</TitleText> 02 JBENJAMINS John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 John Benjamins Publishing Company Amsterdam/Philadelphia NL 04 20140924 2014 John Benjamins B.V. 02 WORLD 13 15 9789027259271 01 JB 3 John Benjamins e-Platform 03 jbe-platform.com 09 WORLD 21 01 00 99.00 EUR R 01 00 83.00 GBP Z 01 gen 00 149.00 USD S 465014991 03 01 01 JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 JB code SLCS 162 Hb 15 9789027259271 13 2014022645 BB 01 SLCS 02 0165-7763 Studies in Language Companion Series 162 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Grammaticalization – Theory and Data</TitleText> 01 slcs.162 01 https://benjamins.com 02 https://benjamins.com/catalog/slcs.162 1 B01 Sylvie Hancil Hancil, Sylvie Sylvie Hancil University of Rouen 2 B01 Ekkehard König König, Ekkehard Ekkehard König Free University Berlin 01 eng 301 viii 293 LAN009000 v.2006 CFF 2 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.HL Historical linguistics 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.MORPH Morphology 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.SYNTAX Syntax 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.THEOR Theoretical linguistics 06 01 Since the 1980s theories and studies of grammaticalization have provided a major source of inspiration for the description and explanation of language change, giving rise to many publications and conferences. This collection presents original, empirical studies that explore various facets of grammaticalization research of both formal and functional orientation. The papers of this selection deal with general issues and specific empirical domains, such as personal pronouns; indefinite pronouns; final particles; tense and aspect markers; comitative markers and coordinating conjunctions. The languages covered include English, German, dialects of Italian, Japanese, Polish, and Walman (Papuan). The book will be of great interest to linguists working on language change in a wide variety of languages. 04 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475/slcs.162.png 04 03 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027259271.jpg 04 03 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027259271.tif 06 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/slcs.162.hb.png 07 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/125/slcs.162.png 25 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/slcs.162.hb.png 27 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/slcs.162.hb.png 10 01 JB code slcs.162.001ack vii viii 2 Article 1 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Acknowledgements</TitleText> 10 01 JB code slcs.162.01int 1 10 10 Article 2 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Introduction</TitleText> 1 A01 Sylvie Hancil Hancil, Sylvie Sylvie Hancil 2 A01 Ekkehard König König, Ekkehard Ekkehard König 10 01 JB code slcs.162.s1 Section header 3 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Part 1. General issues</TitleText> 10 01 JB code slcs.162.02oeh 13 40 28 Article 4 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Acquisition Based and Usage Based Explanations of Grammaticalisation. An Integrative Approach</TitleText> 1 A01 Peter Öhl Öhl, Peter Peter Öhl 01 This paper compares and discusses two mainstream explanations of grammaticalisation processes: Generative accounts regarding them as reflections of structural reanalysis through parametric change during language acquisition, resulting in recategorisation of lexical elements as functional heads in syntactic structure and functionalist approaches that focus on performance, arguing that speakers tend to either improve expressiveness or economise speech production by varying the application of the rules of grammar, which may result in conventionalisation and finally even change the rules of grammar or create new functional elements. Our aim is to integrate the advantages of both approaches. Basically, it is argued that performance-based conventionalisation plays a central role for grammaticalisation by providing the linguistic preconditions for recategorisation of lexical elements as functional ones, or semi-functional elements as fully functional ones. However, changes of the basic rule system of grammar, which includes the parametric representation of functional heads in syntactic structure, cannot be changed except through structural reanalysis during language acquisition. On the other hand, the input for language acquisition is speech, which is shaped by application and, to a certain degree, modification of the functional rules of the grammatical system by the speaker. The part of grammar that is accessible to manipulation by the speaker is called &#8216;fringe-grammar&#8217; in generative theory. Thus the central claim will be: <i>in processes of grammaticalisation, change of the core grammar is often initialised by functional variation at the fringe.</i> The whole process may include several steps of alternate usage-based and acquisition-based changes. This model will be exemplified by its application to the analysis of the development of analytic tenses. 10 01 JB code slcs.162.03app 41 52 12 Article 5 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Grammaticalization and Explanation</TitleText> 1 A01 Irene Appelbaum Appelbaum, Irene Irene Appelbaum 01 A recurring theme in a special issue of <i>Language Sciences </i>(2001)<i> </i>devoted to theoretical debates about grammaticalization is that the causal mechanisms subserving examples of grammaticalization are explanatorily exhaustive and that the concept of grammaticalization itself is therefore empty. The position seems to be a straightforward inference from the assumption that explanation must appeal to causal mechanisms, together with the recognition that grammaticalization is not itself a causal mechanism. While this position is unobjectionable, perhaps even unassailable, in addressing questions of the form <i>How did grammaticalization-examplex occur in languagey&#63; </i>there are other questions that seem to be better addressed by<i> </i>appealing to the concept of grammaticalization itself. In particular, questions of the form <i>What makes language-change-examplex specifically an example of grammaticalization&#63; </i>are best answered by appealing to the fact that it satisfies the concept or definition of grammaticalization. Satisfying the definition of grammaticalization, in turn, requires identifying the language change example specifically as one involving a lexical to grammatical change (or a change from less grammatical to more grammatical), regardless of the causal mechanisms involved in that change. That is, it is only under the description of the phenomenon as a change from lexical form to grammatical form, that the mechanisms typically adduced to explain this change can be said to be explaining it <i>as </i>an instance of grammaticalization. 10 01 JB code slcs.162.04wal 53 66 14 Article 6 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">The perfectivization of the English perfect</TitleText> <TitlePrefix>The </TitlePrefix> <TitleWithoutPrefix textformat="02">perfectivization of the English perfect</TitleWithoutPrefix> <Subtitle textformat="02">is it a case of grammaticalization, after all? The challenge of pluricentrality</Subtitle> 1 A01 Jim Walker Walker, Jim Jim Walker 01 This paper assesses the degree to which the HAVE-perfect in English can truly be thought of as a paradigmatic case of grammaticalization, as has at times been proposed in the literature. By examining the existing scholarship on two proposed recent developments of the HAVE-perfect, its claimed emerging compatibility with definite past time adverbials and its use as a perfective tense to narrate sequences of past-time events, and by proposing new data, the paper demonstrates that it is by no means clear that either of these phenomena are truly emergent, and therefore urges caution in the rush to see grammaticalization afoot. The paper goes on to call for greater caution in theorizing how grammaticalization affects languages, such as English, which are pluricentral and wherein related phenomena may occasionally travel along two clines facing opposite directions. 10 01 JB code slcs.162.05hei 67 86 20 Article 7 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Explaining language structure</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">On categorial misbehavior in Walman (Papua New Guinea)</Subtitle> 1 A01 Bernd Heine Heine, Bernd Bernd Heine 01 Typically, certain grammatical features are associated with one particular lexical category rather than some other category. Nouns can be modified by numerals or adjectives, can take determiners like demonstratives or possessive attributes, can be inflected for number, case, etc. Verbs, by contrast, take markers of tense, aspect, modality and can be negated, etc. But cross-linguistic observations show that one and the same linguistic expression can also be associated with more than one grammatical category. For example, in many languages there are forms that serve the expression of verbal tense or aspect in some of their uses but behave like lexical verbs in other uses; adpositions may be homophonous with nouns, or relative clause markers with demonstratives, etc. In many of these cases, grammaticalization theory has been used to account for such situations.The present paper argues that this framework is also able to explain connections between linguistic structures that appear to be entirely unrelated to one another. Such a case of &#8220;categorial misbehavior&#8221; is reported from the Walman language of Papua New Guinea, where two &#8216;and&#8217;-conjunctions that have the function of conjoining noun phrases have the morphological structure of transitive verbs. Drawing on typological evidence from a number of genetically and areally unrelated languages, the paper proposes a reconstruction of the situation in Walman based on regularities of grammatical change. The main goal of the paper is to argue that grammaticalization theory can provide explanations that appear to be beyond the potential of other linguistic frameworks. Such explanations are external rather than internal, and they are restricted to the question of why languages are structured the way they are, that is, they concern neither the question of how people use their language nor what knowledge they have about their language. 10 01 JB code slcs.162.06tra 87 106 20 Article 8 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Toward a constructional framework for research on language change</TitleText> 1 A01 Elizabeth Closs Traugott Traugott, Elizabeth Closs Elizabeth Closs Traugott 01 Over the past two decades usage-based models of language as a system of form-meaning pairs (&#8216;signs&#8217;) have been developed (e.g. Goldberg 1995, 2006; Croft 2001). These models are known as Construction Grammars. Historical approaches using constructionalist frameworks (e.g. Bergs &#38; Diewald 2008; Bar&#240;dal 2008) have concentrated on accounting for grammatical change. In this paper I present a framework that includes and extends prior work on both grammaticalization and lexicalization (see also Traugott &#38; Trousdale 2013). Because a construction is a sign, the framework requires the researcher to focus on form and meaning equally. Because a construction may be specific or abstract and schematic, each micro-construction can be shown to have its own history within the constraints of larger schemas. Schemas and networks provide a principled way of thinking about analogy. The development of patterns and of changes in productivity are highlighted in constructionalist frameworks. Therefore the focus in this paper is on expansion (see Himmelmann 2004) rather than on the reduction often associated with many earlier models of grammaticalization and lexicalization (e.g. Lehmann 1995; Brinton &#38; Traugott 2005). Expansion and reduction are shown to be intertwined. Therefore unidirectionality has a less prominent theoretical status than is often assigned to it in non-constructionalist models of language change. 10 01 JB code slcs.162.s2 Section header 9 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Part 2. Case studies</TitleText> 10 01 JB code slcs.162.07kok 109 128 20 Article 10 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Grammaticalization of Polish mental predicate prefixes</TitleText> 1 A01 Iwona Kokorniak Kokorniak, Iwona Iwona Kokorniak 2 A01 Malgorzata Fabiszak Fabiszak, Malgorzata Malgorzata Fabiszak 01 This article presents insights into grammaticalization mechanisms in an attempt to elucidate the status of the aspectual prefixes in Polish as semantically &#8216;heavy&#8217; or semantically &#8216;light&#8217;. The verb <i>my&#347;le&#263; </i>&#8216;to think&#8217; and its ten prefixes constitute the subject of investigation. The study employs corpus linguistics as a method and applies a number of tests, also proposing a new one, for identifying the degree of grammaticalization of the individual prefixes. The new test consists in analyzing collocation patterns of the transitive verb in its imperfective form and its perfective counterparts. It shows that the sets of collocates differ between the imperfective and perfective forms with a varying degree of overlap. A higher overlap ratio is interpreted to indicate a higher degree of grammaticalization. 10 01 JB code slcs.162.08shi 129 156 28 Article 11 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">More Thoughts on the Grammaticalization of Personal Pronouns</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">Evidence from the history of Japanese</Subtitle> 1 A01 Reijirou Shibasaki Shibasaki, Reijirou Reijirou Shibasaki 01 The grammatical category of personal pronouns is one of the most researched domains in Japanese as well as in other languages. In fact, works on the genesis and development of Japanese personal pronouns in comparison to those in other languages have been continuously reported long before the notion of grammaticalization was introduced and became an important concept in studies of language change. While preceding studies mostly lay emphasis on the different behaviors between Japanese personal pronouns and the counterparts in European languages, Heine and Song (2010, 2011) exemplify some features common among particular sets of languages i.e. referential shifting between different pronouns, especially from third to second person. As a supplemental survey to Heine and Song (2010, 2011), the present study aims to point out other pathways, especially from first to second person, through which personal pronouns are grammaticalized more in Japanese than in other languages. 10 01 JB code slcs.162.09rus 157 180 24 Article 12 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">The grammaticalization of <i>nom&#601;</i> in the Eastern Abruzzese dialect Ortese</TitleText> <TitlePrefix>The </TitlePrefix> <TitleWithoutPrefix textformat="02">grammaticalization of <i>nom&#601;</i> in the Eastern Abruzzese dialect Ortese</TitleWithoutPrefix> <Subtitle textformat="02">Fromindefinite pronoun to inflectional marker?</Subtitle> 1 A01 Cinzia Russi Russi, Cinzia Cinzia Russi 01 This paper draws attention to the distribution and referential functions <i>nom&#201;&#8482;</i> in Ortonese, an Eastern Abruzzese dialect that, overall, remains relatively understudied. The analysis of original written and spoken data shows that in this dialect <i>nom&#201;&#8482;</i> appears to have reached a more advanced stage of grammaticalization compared to other Eastern Abruzzese dialects (such as Ariellese), given that this element (which has been characterized as an indefinite pronoun), can carry definite referential value and can co-occur with an explicit subject. In Ortonese, then, <i>nom&#201;&#8482;</i> appears to function as a third person plural verbal marker rather than as an (indefinite) pronominal element. With respect to the distribution and range of referential values of <i>nom&#201;&#8482;</i>, Ortonese seems to differ considerably from the neighboring dialect Ariellese (D&#8217;Alessandro &#38; Alexiadou 2006; D&#8217;Alessandro 2010) and, rather, it patterns with the Abruzzese dialects discussed in Manzini and Savoia (2005: 520ff.). 10 01 JB code slcs.162.10rom 181 202 22 Article 13 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">The different developments of progressive aspect markers <i>be in the middle/midst of</i> and <i>be in the process of</i> V-<i>ing</i></TitleText> <TitlePrefix>The </TitlePrefix> <TitleWithoutPrefix textformat="02">different developments of progressive aspect markers <i>be in the middle/midst of</i> and <i>be in the process of</i> V-<i>ing</i></TitleWithoutPrefix> <Subtitle textformat="02">mechanisms of change</Subtitle> 1 A01 Tine Van Rompae Van Rompae, Tine Tine Van Rompae 2 A01 Kristin Davidse Davidse, Kristin Kristin Davidse 01 In this case study, we reconstruct the grammaticalization paths of <i>middle, midst </i>and <i>process</i>, which led to a set of progressive aspect markers (PAMs) in Present-day English. The three PAMs developed from two different source structures, viz. complex prepositions <i>in the middle/midst of </i>&#43; NP and complex appositive noun phrase <i>the process of</i> &#43; NP. The main theoretical aim of the diachronic reconstruction is to identify and characterize the main mechanisms of change that affected the different structures with these nouns on their grammaticalization trajectories: (i) <i>reanalysis</i> in the sense of functional reparsing of an existing structure; (ii) <i>analogization</i>: the attraction of new functional properties to an existing structure; (iii) <i>neo-analysis by analogy</i>: the creation of a functional structure that is new in the item&#8217;s trajectory of change. We also discuss how these mechanisms of change interact with enabling factors such as metaphor and metonymy, collocational fixation, expansion and reclustering, and discursive functions. 10 01 JB code slcs.162.11has 203 234 32 Article 14 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Sequentiality in dialogue as a trigger for grammaticalization</TitleText> 1 A01 Alexander Haselow Haselow, Alexander Alexander Haselow 01 Using the rise of three final particles in spoken English (<i>then</i>, <i>though, anyway</i>) as a case study it will be shown that dialogic interaction is an important domain of grammaticalization. The central idea is that grammaticalization may be induced by the regularization of interactive sequences which, over time, freeze into dialogic schemas and trigger a change of originally lexical or sentence-internal grammatical items involved in such schemas into elements establishing relations beyond the sentence level. The study shows that the proper domain of grammaticalization is not an individual element, but the dialogic context in which it is regularly used. Corpus-based, empirical data are used to document the grammaticalization of the three final particles in different text types within a framework that conceives of grammaticalization as structural and contextual expansion (rather than reduction) and as a functional (rather than formal) change. 10 01 JB code slcs.162.12han 235 256 22 Article 15 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">The final particle <i>but</i> in British English</TitleText> <TitlePrefix>The </TitlePrefix> <TitleWithoutPrefix textformat="02">final particle <i>but</i> in British English</TitleWithoutPrefix> <Subtitle textformat="02">an instance of cooptation and grammaticalization at work</Subtitle> 1 A01 Sylvie Hancil Hancil, Sylvie Sylvie Hancil 01 Even though final <i>but </i>is still a relatively recent phenomenon in British English, it is worth studying in more detail. The purpose of the article is to shed some light on final <i>but</i> in the spoken part of the <i>British National Corpus</i> (BNC) and in the <i>Newcastle Electronic Corpus of Tyneside English </i>(NECTE). The examination of the various semantic-pragmatic meanings shows that they can directly be put along a specific grammaticalization chain and that instead of being explainable in terms of pragmaticalization, they can be better explained in terms of cooptation and grammaticalization. 10 01 JB code slcs.162.13izu 257 286 30 Article 16 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">&#8220;Final hanging but&#8221; in American English</TitleText> <Subtitle textformat="02">Where a formal coordinator meets a functional subordinator</Subtitle> 1 A01 Mitsuko Narita Izutsu Izutsu, Mitsuko Narita Mitsuko Narita Izutsu 2 A01 Katsunobu Izutsu Izutsu, Katsunobu Katsunobu Izutsu 01 Mulder and Thompson (2006, 2008) point out that the final hanging <i>but</i> ([X <i>but</i>]) developed from initial <i>but</i> (X [<i>but</i> Y]) through a sequence of formal reanalyses, and insightfully observe the functional and formal parallelism between the development of the hanging type of final <i>but</i> and the final particalization of the Japanese subordinator -<i>kedo</i>. The present article demonstrates that <i>but</i> (and <i>and</i> as well) can perform a terminal bracketing function and serve as functional subordinators in spoken American English, and that they behave like final particles when the sentences are truncated. Although they are not so final-particalized as Australian final <i>but</i>, their interpersonal functions in final position are edging them closer to the status of final particles in spoken American English. 10 01 JB code slcs.162.14aut 287 288 2 Article 17 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Author index</TitleText> 10 01 JB code slcs.162.15sub 289 294 6 Article 18 <TitleType>01</TitleType> <TitleText textformat="02">Subject index</TitleText> 02 JBENJAMINS John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 John Benjamins Publishing Company Amsterdam/Philadelphia NL 04 20140924 2014 John Benjamins B.V. 02 WORLD 08 690 gr 01 JB 1 John Benjamins Publishing Company +31 20 6304747 +31 20 6739773 bookorder@benjamins.nl 01 https://benjamins.com 01 WORLD US CA MX 21 3 16 01 02 JB 1 00 99.00 EUR R 02 02 JB 1 00 104.94 EUR R 01 JB 10 bebc +44 1202 712 934 +44 1202 712 913 sales@bebc.co.uk 03 GB 21 16 02 02 JB 1 00 83.00 GBP Z 01 JB 2 John Benjamins North America +1 800 562-5666 +1 703 661-1501 benjamins@presswarehouse.com 01 https://benjamins.com 01 US CA MX 21 1 16 01 gen 02 JB 1 00 149.00 USD