Grammaticalization – Theory and Data : Theory and Data.

Grammaticalization - Theory and Data -- Editorial page -- Title page -- LCC data -- Table of contents -- Acknowledgements -- Introduction -- Part 1. General and theoretical issues -- Part 2. Case studies -- References -- Acquisition-based and usage-based explanations of grammaticalisation -- 1. Generative vs. functional approaches -- 2. Integration: Performance and parametrisation -- 3. Case examples -- 3.1 Romance futures -- 3.2 German perfect (cf. Öhl 2009a) -- 3.3 Remarks on the auxiliation of the copula -- 4. Conclusion -- References -- Grammaticalization and explanation -- 1. Introduction -- 2. A background of consensus -- 3. Arguments against the explanatory potential of grammaticalization -- 4. In defense of the explanatory potential of grammaticalization -- 5. Unidirectionality, the process question, and reductionism -- Unidirectionality -- Process vs. Processes -- Reductionism -- 6. Concluding remarks -- References -- The perfectivization of the English perfect -- 1. Introduction -- 2. The perfectivisation of the HAVE-perfect - prototypical grammaticalization? -- 3. The changing perfect in English -- a. HAVE-perfects with definite past time adverbials -- b. Narrative HAVE-perfects -- 4. An increase in HAVE-perfect with past time adverbials? -- 5. Which English are we discussing? -- 6. Conclusion -- References -- Explaining language structure -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Questions -- 3. Reconstruction -- 4. Conclusions -- Acknowledgements -- Abbreviations -- References -- Toward a constructional framework for research on language change -- 1. Introduction -- 2. The main features of the constructionalization model -- 3. A constructional approach to grammaticalization -- 4. A constructional approach to lexicalization -- 5. Major similarities and differences between contentful and procedural constructionalization.

6. The value added of a constructional approach -- Data Bases -- References -- Grammaticalization of Polish mental predicate prefixes -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Grammaticalization -- 3. Prefix semantics and its contribution to the meaning of the mental verb -- 4. Classification of prefixes into pure perfectivizers and lexical prefixes: A case study on the verb myśleć 'to think' -- 5. Conclusions -- References -- More thoughts on the grammaticalization of personal pronouns -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Referential shifting from third to second person: Heine and Song (2010, 2011) -- 3. Referential shifting of Japanese personal pronouns -- 3.1 From third to second person -- 3.2 From first to second person -- 3.2.1 Examples -- 3.2.2 Lexical origins -- 4. Why reference shifts in certain directions -- 4.1 A noun-pronoun continuum -- 4.2 Socio-cultural factors -- 4.3 Remaining issues -- 5. A short history of wrestling with 'person' in Japanese -- 6. Concluding remarks -- Acknowledgements -- Glossing conventions -- References -- Corpus -- Appendix -- The grammaticalization of nomə in the Eastern Abruzzese dialect Ortonese -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Characterizations of nomə -- 3. Omo in Old Abruzzese -- 4. Nomə in Ariellese -- 5. Nomə in written Ortonese -- 6. Nomə in spoken Ortonese -- 7. Conclusion -- References -- Sources -- Sequentiality in dialogue as a trigger for grammaticalization -- 1. Introduction -- 2. The corpus -- 3. Grammaticalization in interactive contexts -- 4. Dialogic language use -- 5. Final particles -- 6. Dialogic schema I: Implied conditional relations with final then -- 7. Dialogic schema II: Dissonant relations with final though -- 8. Dialogic schema III: Concessive conditional relations with final anyway -- 9. Others factors motivating the grammaticalization of final particles -- 10. Conclusion -- Corpora -- References.

"Final hanging but" in American English -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Final but: "hanging implication" and "final particle" -- 2.1 "Grammaticization continuum" -- 2.2 Truncation and backshift: Two pathways to final buts -- 3. Functional subordinators and and but -- 3.1 How English coordinators are translated? -- 3.2 Discourse-functions of [X and] and [X but] clauses -- 3.3 The terminal bracketing function of and and but in spontaneous conversation -- 4. From left-subordinating coordinators to final particles -- 4.1 Truncation type of final and -- 4.2 Truncation type of final but -- 5. From functional subordinators to final particles -- 5.1 The rise of an interpersonal function in final coordinators -- 5.2 Dependency and hanging implication -- 6. Conclusion -- Keys to abbreviations -- References -- Author index -- Subject index.

Mulder and Thompson (2006, 2008) point out that the final hanging but ([X but]) developed from initial but (X [but Y]) through a sequence of formal reanalyses, and insightfully observe the functional and formal parallelism between the development of the hanging type of final but and the final particalization of the Japanese subordinator -kedo. The present article demonstrates that but (and and 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 but, their interpersonal functions in final position are edging them closer to the status of final particles in spoken American English.

Description based on publisher supplied metadata and other sources.

Electronic reproduction. Ann Arbor, Michigan : ProQuest Ebook Central, 2024. Available via World Wide Web. Access may be limited to ProQuest Ebook Central affiliated libraries.