Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Historical Syntax
- Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics
- The Cambridge Handbook of Historical Syntax
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Abbreviations
- Introduction
- Part I Types and Mechanisms of Syntactic Change
- 1 Grammaticalization
- 2 Degrammaticalization
- 3 Exaptation
- 4 Reanalysis
- 5 Analogy and Extension
- 6 Restructuring
- 7 Parameter Setting
- 8 Contact and Borrowing
- Part II Methods and Tools
- Part III Principles and Constraints
- Part IV Major Issues and Themes
- Part V Explanations
- Part VI Models and Approaches
- Index
- References
1 - Grammaticalization
from Part I - Types and Mechanisms of Syntactic Change
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 April 2017
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Historical Syntax
- Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics
- The Cambridge Handbook of Historical Syntax
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Abbreviations
- Introduction
- Part I Types and Mechanisms of Syntactic Change
- 1 Grammaticalization
- 2 Degrammaticalization
- 3 Exaptation
- 4 Reanalysis
- 5 Analogy and Extension
- 6 Restructuring
- 7 Parameter Setting
- 8 Contact and Borrowing
- Part II Methods and Tools
- Part III Principles and Constraints
- Part IV Major Issues and Themes
- Part V Explanations
- Part VI Models and Approaches
- Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Historical Syntax , pp. 7 - 27Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2017
References
Abraham, W. 1991. ‘The grammaticalization of the German modal particles’, in Traugott, and Heine, (eds.), pp. 331–80.Google Scholar
Abraham, W. 1993. ‘Einleitung zum Thema dieses Bandes. Grammatikalisierung und Reanalyse: Einander ausschließende oder ergänzende Begriffe?’, Folia Linguistica Historica 13(1–2): 7–26.Google Scholar
Bisang, W. 2004. ‘Grammaticalization without coevolution of form and meaning: The case of tense-aspect-modality in East and mainland Southeast Asia’, in Bisang, , Himmelmann, and Wiemer, (eds.), pp. 109–38.Google Scholar
Bisang, W. 2010. ‘Grammaticalization in Chinese: A construction-based account’, in Traugott, and Trousdale, (eds.), pp. 245–77.Google Scholar
Bisang, W., Himmelmann, N. P. and Wiemer, B. (eds.) 2004. What makes grammaticalization? A look from its fringes and its components. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boland, J. H. G. 2006. ‘Aspect, tense, and modality: Theory, typology, acquisition’, unpublished PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Bruyn, A. 1995a. ‘Relative clauses in early Sranan’, in Arends, J. (ed.), The early stages of creolization. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 149–202.Google Scholar
Bruyn, A. 1995b. Grammaticalization in creoles: The development of determiners and relative clauses in Sranan. Amsterdam: Institute for Functional Research into Language and Language Use (IFOTT).Google Scholar
Bruyn, A. 1996. ‘On identifying instances of grammaticalization in creole languages’, in Baker, Ph. and Syea, A. (eds.), Changing meanings, changing functions: Papers relating to grammaticalization in contact languages. London: University of Westminster Press, pp. 29–46.Google Scholar
Bruyn, A. 1998. ‘What can this be?’, in Schmid, M. S., Austin, J. R. and Stein, D. (eds.), Historical linguistics 1997: Selected papers from the 13th International conference on historical linguistics, Düsseldorf, 10–17 August 1997. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 25–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J. 2003. ‘Mechanisms of change in grammaticization: The role of frequency’, in Joseph, and Janda, (eds.), pp. 602–23.Google Scholar
Bybee, J. L., Haiman, J. and Noonan, M. (eds.), 2001. Complex sentences in grammar and discourse: Studies presented to Sandra Thompson. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Bybee, J. L., Perkins, R. D. and Pagliuca, W. 1994. The evolution of grammar: Tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the world. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cinque, G. 2001. ‘A note on mood, modality, tense and aspect affixes in Turkish’, in Taylan, E. E. (ed.), The verb in Turkish. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 47–59.Google Scholar
Crass, J. 2002. ‘Die Grammatikalisierung des Verbes “sagen” im Beria’, unpublished MS, University of Mainz.Google Scholar
De Smet, H. 2010. ‘Grammatical interference: Subject marker for and the phrasal verb particles out and forth’, in Traugott, and Trousdale, (eds.), pp. 75–104.Google Scholar
Diessel, H. 2005. The acquisition of complex sentences (Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 105). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dik, S. 1997. The theory of functional grammar, part 1: The structure of the clause, 2nd rev. edn, ed. Hengeveld, K.. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Ebert, K. 1991. ‘Vom Verbum dicendi zur Konjunktion: Ein Kapitel universaler Grammatikentwicklung’, in Bisang, W. and Rinderknecht, P. (eds.), Von Europa bis Ozeanien – von der Antonymie zum Relativsatz: Gedenkschrift für Meinrad Scheller. Zurich: Arbeiten des Seminars für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Zürich, pp. 77–95.Google Scholar
Frajzyngier, Z. 1996. Grammaticalization of the complex sentence: A case study in Chadic (Studies in Language Companion Series 32). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gisborne, N. 2011. ‘Constructions, word grammar, and grammaticalization’, Cognitive Linguistics 22(1): 155–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gisborne, N. and Patten, A. 2011. ‘Construction grammar and grammaticalization’, in Narrog, and Heine, (eds.), pp. 92–104.Google Scholar
Givón, T. 1971. ‘Historical syntax and synchronic morphology: An archaeologist’s field trip’, Chicago Linguistic Society 7: 394–415.Google Scholar
Givón, T. 1975. ‘Topic, pronoun and grammatical agreement’, in Li, Ch. N. (ed.), Word order and word order change. Austin: University of Texas Press, pp. 149–88.Google Scholar
Givón, T. 1991. ‘The evolution of dependent clause morpho-syntax in Biblical Hebrew’, in Traugott, and Heine, (eds.), pp. 257–310.Google Scholar
Givón, T. 2006. ‘Multiple routes to clause union: The diachrony of syntactic complexity’, unpublished MS, University of Oregon.Google Scholar
Harris, A. C. and Campbell, L. 1995. Historical syntax in cross-linguistic perspective. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heine, B. 2009. ‘Complexity via expansion’, in Givón, T. and Shibatani, M. (eds.), Syntactic complexity: Diachrony, acquisition, neuro-cognition, evolution. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 23–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heine, B., Claudi, U. and Hünnemeyer, F. 1991. Grammaticalization: A conceptual framework. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Heine, B. and Kuteva, T. 2002. World lexicon of grammaticalization. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heine, B. and Kuteva, T. 2007. The genesis of grammar: A reconstruction. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hengeveld, K. 1989. ‘Layers and operators in Functional Grammar’, Journal of Linguistics 25: 127–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hengeveld, K. 2011. ‘The grammaticalization of tense and aspect’, in Narrog, and Heine, (eds.), pp. 580–94.Google Scholar
Hengeveld, K. and Lachlan Mackenzie, J. 2008. Functional discourse grammar: A typologically-based theory of language structure. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Himmelmann, N. P. 2004. ‘Lexicalization and grammaticalization: Opposite or orthogonal?’, in Bisang, , Himmelmann, and Wiemer, (eds.), pp. 21–42.Google Scholar
Hopper, P. J. 1982. Tense-aspect: Between semantics and pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopper, P. J. and Traugott, E. C. 2003. Grammaticalization. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joseph, B. D. and Janda, R. D. (eds.) 2003. The handbook of historical linguistics. Malden, MA: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klamer, M. 2000. ‘How report verbs become quote markers and complementisers’, Lingua 110: 69–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuryłowicz, J. [1965] 1976. ‘The evolution of grammatical categories’. Reprinted in Kuryłowicz, J., Esquisses linguistiques, vol. 2, Munich: Fink, pp. 38–54.Google Scholar
Lord, C. D. 1976. ‘Evidence for syntactic reanalysis: From verb to complementizer in Kwa’, in Steever, S. B., Walker, C. A. and Mufwene, S. S. (eds.), Papers from the parasession on diachronic syntax. Chicago Linguistic Society, pp. 179–91.Google Scholar
Meillet, A. 1912. ‘L’évolution des formes grammaticales’, Scientia (Rivista di Scienza) 12: 384–400.Google Scholar
Narrog, H. 2009. Modality in Japanese: The layered structure of clause and hierarchies of functional categories. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Narrog, H. 2010. ‘The order of meaningful elements in the Japanese verbal complex’, Morphology 20(1): 205–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Narrog, H. 2012. Modality, subjectivity, and semantic change: A cross-linguistic perspective. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Narrog, H. and Heine, B. (eds.) 2011. The Oxford handbook of grammaticalization. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Noël, D. 2007. ‘Diachronic construction grammar and grammaticalization theory’, Functions of Language 14(2):177–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patten, A. 2012. The English it-cleft: A constructional account and a diachronic investigation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plag, I. 1993. Sentential complementation in Sranan: On the formation of an English-based creole language. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Plag, I. 1994. ‘On the diachrony of creole complementizers: The development of Sranan taki and dati’, Amsterdam Creole Studies 11: 40–65.Google Scholar
Plag, I. 1995. ‘The emergence of taki as a complementizer in Sranan: On substrate influence, universals, and gradual creolization’, in Arends, J. (ed.), The early stages of creolization. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 113–48.Google Scholar
Roberts, I. 1993. ‘A formal account of grammaticalization in the history of Romance futures’, Folia Linguistica Historica 13: 219–58.Google Scholar
Roberts, I. 2010. ‘Grammaticalization, the clausal hierarchy and semantic bleaching’, in Traugott, and Trousdale, (eds.), pp. 45–73.Google Scholar
Roberts, I. and Roussou, A. 2003. Syntactic change: A minimalist approach to grammaticalization. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shi, Y. and Li, Ch. N. 2002. ‘The establishment of the classifier system and the grammaticalization of the morphosyntactic particle de in Chinese’, Language Sciences 24: 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Traugott, E. C. 1988. ‘Pragmatic strengthening and grammaticalization’, Berkeley Linguistics Society 14: 406–16.Google Scholar
Traugott, E. C. 2003. ‘Constructions in grammaticalization’, in Joseph, and Janda, (eds.), pp. 624–47.Google Scholar
Traugott, E. C. 2008. ‘The grammaticalization of NP of NP patterns’, in Bergs, A. and Diewald, G. (eds.), Constructions and language change. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 23–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Traugott, E. C. and Heine, B. (eds.) 1991. Approaches to grammaticalization, vol. 2. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Traugott, E. C. and Trousdale, G. (eds.) 2010. Gradience, gradualness and grammaticalization. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trousdale, G. 2008. ‘Constructions in grammaticalization and lexicalization: Evidence from the history of a composite predicate construction in English’, in Trousdale, G. and Gisborne, N. (eds.), Constructional approaches to English Grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 33–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trousdale, G. 2012. ‘Grammaticalization, constructions and the grammaticalization of constructions’, in Davidse, K. et al. (eds.), Grammaticalization and language change: New reflections. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 167–98.Google Scholar
van Bogaert, J. 2011. ‘I think and other complement-taking mental predicates: A case of and for constructional grammaticalization’, Linguistics 49(2): 295–332.Google Scholar
van Gelderen, E. 1993. The rise of functional categories. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Gelderen, E. 2004. Grammaticalization as economy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Gelderen, E. 2009. ‘Feature Economy in the linguistic cycle’, in Crisma, P. and Longobardi, G. (eds.), Historical syntax and linguistic theory. Oxford University Press, pp. 93–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Gelderen, E. 2011. ‘Grammaticalization and generative grammar: A difficult liaison’, in Narrog, and Heine, (eds.), pp. 43–55.Google Scholar
Wu, Zoe. 2004. Grammaticalization and language change in Chinese. London: Routledge Curzon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 28
- Cited by