Chapter published in:
Extravagant Morphology: Studies in rule-bending, pattern-extending and theory-challenging morphology
Edited by Matthias Eitelmann and Dagmar Haumann
[Studies in Language Companion Series 223] 2022
► pp. 207–232

They’re proing it up hardcore

An analysis of the V it up construction

| University of Mainz
The V it up construction expresses an exuberant or excessive performance of the activity denoted by the verb. The present study uses data from Twitter and the Urban Dictionary to analyse current uses of V it up. It employs the frameworks of extravagance (Haspelmath 1999/Keller 1994), expressiveness (Zwicky & Pullum 1987) and gradual transitivity (Hopper & Thompson 1980) to assess the range of heads that partake in the construction and the way it marks these as verbs. Results show that the construction is productively used with verbs converted from various word-classes and even with phrases in the open slot. The construction’s ability to take these extravagant heads goes hand in hand with its penchant for imperatives and progressives, which emphasise the action and are thus excellent verbalisers.
Keywords: transitivity, social media, conversion, verbal constructions
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Properties of the V it up construction
    • 2.1Linguistic description of V it up and its components
    • 2.2Speakers’ intuitions about V it up
  • 3.Extravagance, expressiveness and transitivity
    • 3.1Extravagance
    • 3.2Expressiveness
    • 3.3Transitivity and prototypicality
  • 4.Data and method
  • 5.Analysis: V it up on Twitter
    • 5.1Promiscuity with regard to input category & input basehood
    • 5.2Transitivity and prototypicality
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 16 March 2022
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.223.09sch
References
Aitchison, Jean
2003 Metaphors, models and language change. In Motives for Language Change, Raymond Hickey (ed), 39–53. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Allerton, David
1982 Valency and the English Verb. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan & Finegan, Edward
1999 Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Pearson.Google Scholar
Cappelle, Bert
2005 Particle Patterns in English. A Comprehensive Coverage. Thesis, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.Google Scholar
Cole, Peter
1983 The Grammatical Role of the Causee in Universal Grammar. International Journal of American Linguistics 49(2): 115–133. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Depallday
2011 World Series of Poker down to three. 8 November 2011, https://​depallday​.wordpress​.com​/2011​/11​/08​/world​-series​-of​-poker​-down​-to​-three/ (20 April 2020).Google Scholar
Declerck, Renaat
2011 The definition of modality. In Cognitive Approaches to Tense, Aspect, and Epistemic Modality, Patard, Adeline & Brisard, Frank (eds), 21-44. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Declerck, Renaat, Reed, Susan & Cappelle, Bert
2006 The Grammar of the English Verb Phrase. Volume 1: The Grammar of the English Tense System: A Comprehensive Analysis. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Dowty, David
1991 Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67(3): 547–619. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fitzgerald, Tom & Marquez, Lorenzo
2013 WERQ: Bruce Willis in Dolce&Gabbana at the “Red 2” Premiere. Tom & Lorenzo. 12 July 2013. https://​tomandlorenzo​.com​/2013​/07​/werq​-bruce​-willis​-in​-dolcegabbana​-at​-the​-red​-2​-premiere/ (20 April, 2020).Google Scholar
Fraser, James B.
1961 An Examination of the Verb-Particle Construction in English. PhD Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Gardelle, Laure
2011  Whoop her up, hit it, go it alone: The role of the personal pronoun in the fossilization process. Yearbook of Phraseology 2: 163–178. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gilquin, Gaëtanelle
2010 Corpus, Cognition and Causative Constructions. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Givón, Talmy
1984 Syntax. A Functional-Typological Introduction. Volume I. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2001 Syntax. Volume II. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, Adele
2016 Tuning in to the verb-particle construction in English. In Approaches to Complex Predicates, Léa Nash & Pollet Samvelian (eds), 110–141. Leiden: Brill. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin
1999 Why is grammaticalization irreversible? Linguistics 37(6): 1043–1068. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. & Thompson, Sandra A.
1980 Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language 56(2): 251–299. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Keller, Rudi
1994 Language Change: The Invisible Hand in Language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George
1987 Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, George & Johnson, Mark
1980 Metaphors we Live by. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Mondorf, Britta
2016 ‘Snake legs it to freedom’: Dummy it as pseudo-object. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 12(1): 73–102. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mondorf, Britta & Schneider, Ulrike
2016 Detransitivization as a support strategy for causative bring . English Language and Linguistics 20(3): 439–462. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
New Oxford American Dictionary
, s.v. “yuck2” 2011, <https://​www​.oxfordreference​.com (20 April 2020).Google Scholar
OED Online
s.v. “extravagant, adj. and n.”, March 2020 www​.oed​.com​/view​/Entry​/67142 (20 April 2020).
OED Online
, s.v. “ham, v.2.”, March 2020 <www​.oed​.com​/view​/Entry​/83694 (20 April 2020).Google Scholar
OED Online
, s.v. “jazz, v.”, March 2020 <www​.oed​.com​/view​/Entry​/100939 (20 April 2020).Google Scholar
OED Online
, s.v. “keep, v.”, March 2020 <www​.oed​.com​/view​/Entry​/102776 (20 April 2020).Google Scholar
OED Online
, s.v. “live, v.”, March 2020 <www​.oed​.com​/view​/Entry​/109300 (20 April 2020).Google Scholar
Peckham, Aaron
2005 Urban Dictionary. Fularious Street Slang Defined. Kansas, MO: Andrews McMeel.Google Scholar
Postal, Paul M. & Pullum, Geoffrey K.
1988 Expletive noun phrases in subcategorized positions. Linguistic Inquiry 19(4): 635–670.Google Scholar
Quayle, Nigel
1994 UP et le verbe à particule en anglais contemporain. Lille: Presses Universitaires de Lille.Google Scholar
Rohdenburg, Günter
1996 Zur Einführung und Behauptung lexikalischer Einheiten durch syntaktische Struktursignale im Englischen. In Lexical Structures and Language Use. Proceedings of the International Conference on Lexicology and Lexical Semantics Münster, September 13–15, 1994, Edda Weigand & Franz Hundsnurscher (eds), 105–117. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Rose, Ashley
2017 Sugar and cloth. Instagram, 16 December 2017, https://​www​.instagram​.com​/p​/BcvryLaF733/ (20 April 2020).Google Scholar
Scherl, Magdalena
2018 TwitterCorpusQuery 2.0. Mainz.Google Scholar
Sheridan, Thomas
1780 A General Dictionary of the English Language. London: Dodsley, Dilly and Wilkie.Google Scholar
Taylor, John R.
1995 Linguistic Categorization. Prototypes in Linguistic Theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Urban Dictionary, s.v
“-ing it up”, 4 August 2004, https://​www​.urbandictionary​.com​/define​.php​?term​=-ing%20it%20up (20 April 2020)
Zwicky, Arnold M. & Pullum, Geoffrey K.
1987 Plain morphology and expressive morphology. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 1987, John Aske, Natasha Beery, Laura Michaelis & Hana Filip (eds), 330–340. CrossrefGoogle Scholar