Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T19:27:52.426Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Same time, across time: simultaneity clauses from Late Modern to Present-Day English*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 October 2010

CRISTIANO BROCCIAS  and
NICHOLAS SMITH
CRISTIANO BROCCIAS
Affiliation:
Facoltà di Lingue e Letterature Straniere, Università di Genova, Piazza S. Sabina 2, 16124 Genova, [email protected]
NICHOLAS SMITH
Affiliation:
School of English, Sociology, Politics & Contemporary History, University of Salford, Manchester M5 4WT, [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this article we offer a diachronic analysis of simultaneity subordinator as against the background of simultaneity subordinators while, whilst, when from 1650 to the end of the twentieth century. The present survey makes use of data extracted from the British English component of ARCHER (version 3.1), focusing in particular on fiction, the register par excellence for the use of simultaneity subordinators. We analyse our data according to a selection of parameters (ordering, verb type, duration, tense and aspect, subject identity, simultaneity type) and show that, against a background of relative stability, the major change is a dramatic increase in the frequency of simultaneity as-clauses from the first half of the nineteenth century onwards. Adapting the historical work on stylistic change by Biber and Finegan (1989, 1997), as well as theoretical and experimental accounts of the semantics of English simultaneity markers, we highlight an interesting parallelism between the spread of as-clauses in oral narrative from childhood to adulthood and the spread of as-clauses in modern fiction. In either case, the spread of as may be symptomatic of an evolution in narrative techniques, particularly in respect of the means by which complex events are typically represented.

Type
Research Article
Information
English Language & Linguistics , Volume 14 , Issue 3 , November 2010 , pp. 347 - 371
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adamson, Sylvia. 1998. Literary language. In Romaine, Suzanne (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language, vol. 4, 589–692. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Adamson, Sylvia. 1999. Literary language. In Lass, Roger (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language, vol. 3, 539–653. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Beal, Joan. 2004. English in modern times. 1700–1945. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Finegan, Edward & Atkinson, Dwight. 1994. ARCHER and its challenges: compiling and exploring A Representative Corpus of Historical English Registers. In Fries, Udo, Tottie, Gunnel & Schneider, Peter (eds.), 1–14. Creating and using English language corpora. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas. 2008. Corpora and the history of English: ARCHER 3 and beyond. Paper presented at the ARCHER symposium, Freiburg, 12 December 2008.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas & Finegan, Edward. 1989. Drift and the evolution of English style: A history of three genres. Language 65, 487–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas & Finegan, Edward. 1997. Diachronic relations among speech–based and written registers in English. In Nevalainen, Terttu & Kahlas-Tarkka, Leena (eds.), To explain the present: Studies in the changing English language in honour of Matti Rissanen, 253–75. Helsinki: Mémoires de la Société Néophilologique de Helsinki.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan & Finegan, Edward. 1999. Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Broccias, Cristiano. 2006a. The construal of simultaneity in English with special reference to as-clauses. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics 4, 97–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broccias, Cristiano. 2006b. The English simultaneity network: The case of as and while-clauses. LACUS Forum 32, 33–41.Google Scholar
Broccias, Cristiano. 2008. Imperfectivity and transience: The two sides of the progressive aspect in simultaneity clauses. Journal of English Linguistics 36, 155–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christ, Oliver. 1994. A modular and flexible architecture for an integrated corpus query system. Proceedings of COMPLEX ‘94. Third Conference on Computational Lexicography and Text Research (Budapest, 7–10 July 1994), 23–32. Budapest.Google Scholar
Declerck, Renaat. 1997. When-clauses and temporal structure. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Declerck, Renaat (in collaboration with Susan Reed & Bert Cappelle). 2006. The grammar of the English tense system. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diessel, Holger. 2008. Iconicity of sequence. A corpus-based analysis of the positioning of temporal adverbial clauses in English. Cognitive Linguistics 19, 457–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evert, Stefan. 2006. How random is a corpus? The library metaphor. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 54, 177–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fludernik, Monika. 1996. Towards a ‘natural’ narratology. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Garside, Roger & Smith, Nicholas. 1997. A hybrid grammatical tagger: CLAWS 4. In Garside, Roger, Leech, Geoffrey & McEnery, Anthony (eds.), Corpus annotation: Linguistic information from computer text corpora, 102–21. Harlow: Addison Wesley Longman.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
González-Cruz, Ana I. 2007. On the subjectification of adverbial clause connectives: Semantic and pragmatic considerations on the development of while-clauses. In Lenker, Ursula & Meurman-Solin, Anneli (eds.), Connectives in the history of English, 145–66. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2004. An introduction to Functional Grammar, 2nd edition. London: Hodder Arnold.Google Scholar
Kortmann, Bernd. 1997. Adverbial subordination: A typology and history of adverbial subordinators based on European languages. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, Lori. 1996. Time and cause in the English connector as. LACUS Forum 23, 417–28.Google Scholar
Övergaard, Gerd. 1987. Duration, progression, and the progressive form in as-clauses. In Lindblad, Ishrat & Ljung, Magnus (eds.), Proceedings from the Third Nordic Conference for English Studies, vol. 1, 265–80. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International.Google Scholar
Pasicki, Adam. 1983. While-clauses in Old and Early Middle English. Folia Linguistica Historica 4, 287–303.Google Scholar
Pasicki, Adam. 1987. Temporal adverbials in Old and Middle English. Lublin: Radakcja Wydawnictwo Katelickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey & Svartvik, Jan. 1995. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Schmiedtová, Barbara. 2004. At the same time. . .: The expression of simultaneity in learner varieties. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silva, Marilyn. 1991. Simultaneity in children's narratives: The case of when, while and as. Journal of Child Language 18, 641–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Slobin, Dan. 1988. The development of clause chaining in Turkish child language. Paper presented at the Fourth Conference on Turkish Linguistics, Middle East Technical University.Google Scholar
Smith, Nicholas. 1997. Improving a tagger. In Garside, Roger, Leech, Geoffrey & McEnery, Anthony (eds.), Corpus annotation: Linguistic information from computer text corpora, 137–50. Harlow: Addison Wesley Longman.Google Scholar