An Van linden

This paper starts from the functional and structural similarity of stance constructions with ‘no’ wonder and ‘no’ chance in Present-day English, and sets out to compare their diachronic development. Synchronically, these two ‘no’ + semiotic noun strings take part in the same formal types of grammatical stance construction, i.e. as main clauses, with the propositions in their scope coded as complement clauses, and as stance adverbials, with the propositions in their scope coded as independent clauses. Another similarity is that the clausal patterns show two types of use, i.e. lexical and grammatical use. While grammatical uses of ‘no’ wonder strings convey mirative qualification, those of ‘no’ chance strings express epistemic qualification. Study of corpus data reveals differences in the availability of structural types – within clausal and adverbial patterns – between the two strings studied, as well as in polarity preferences, which follow naturally from the differences observed in their respective diachronic development. While negative polarity triggered the development of grammatical – mirative – meaning in the ‘no’ wonder strings, it did not serve this role in the development of dynamic-epistemic (and later on purely epistemic) meaning in the chance data. This explains why wonder occurs predominantly with negative polarity in Present-day English, while no such preference is observed for chance.

This paper focusses on verb-based nominalization in Harakmbut (isolate, Peru), which falls into two formal types on the basis of the prefix used. The first type, using the nominalizing prefix wa(ʔ)-, is restricted to participant nominalization and is predominantly used to produce nouns for NP-use. The second type, using the nominalizing prefix e(ʔ)-, is mainly used for event nominalization and typically produces multi-word nominalizations. Depending on the constructions they occur in and additional suffixation they take, nominalizations with e(ʔ)-can serve complementation as well as adverbial functions. Across the two formal types, multi-word nominalizations combine NP-like external syntax with verb-like internal syntax. The two nominalizing prefixes also serve a basic function in noun-based nominalization, lending independent status to obligatorily bound nouns.

This study offers an analysis of independent conditional clauses (ICCs) that are used with argumentative functions in spoken Dutch. ICCs are used as arguments when they serve to motivate the speaker's implied standpoint regarding a preceding propositional content, termed the trigger. Two basic types of argumentative ICCs can be distinguished, which are termed 'direct' and 'indirect' arguments. Direct arguments express a contextually given premise on the basis of which a conclusion about the speaker's standpoint regarding a preceding trigger can be drawn. Indirect arguments, by contrast, express a condition that – if it had held – would have warranted the conclusion, but its counterfactual interpretation resulting from hypothetical backshift signals that the speaker knows that this condition is not fulfilled, and hence that the implied standpoint regarding a trigger is not valid either. We argue that direct and indirect ICCs instantiate independent instances of epistemic non-predictive conditionals and hypothetical predictive conditionals (in the sense of Dancygier) respectively, and that they set up propositional-logic arguments of different classic forms, i.e. the modus ponendo ponens form (direct ICCs) and the denying the antecedent form (indirect ICCs). However, they do not explicitly express the conclusion of the argument, as they lack a main clause, but leave it to be inferred by the addressee.

This article examines modal expressions with the comparative adverbs better, rather and sooner in American English, and assesses to what extent they have grammaticalized. The corpus data offer evidence that the three comparative modal groups exhibit considerable phonetic reduction in the 1810–2009 period studied. Analysis of several aspects of the constructions, such as subject types, temporal reference and comparative meaning, reveals which conditions promoted this erosion. However, the data also indicate that the three groups are semantically and constructionally quite heterogeneous. In fact, this article proposes a grammaticalization scenario for the rather and sooner structures that is different from the one posited for the better structures.

This paper presents an analysis of complement insubordination in Dutch, i.e structures that are formally marked as subordinate complement clauses but conventionally used as main clauses. We develop a typology of seven distinct construction types (in three semantic domains), none of which have been analysed in detail before. From a more general perspective, we show that insubordinate constructions provide a fresh perspective on the analysis of modality and evaluation, with semantic parameters that are not found in more typical exponents like modal verbs. In addition, we show that it is difficult to develop a schematic generalization over the different construction types, in spite of their apparent formal similarity as complement structures. We argue that this points to separate developmental trajectories for the different types, with a point of origin in different main-subordinate constructions, and different degrees of conventionalization for the resulting insubordinate constructions.

This study analyses the semantics of English deontic adjectives like essential and appropriate, and uses this to refine traditional definitions of deontic modality, which are mainly based on the study of modal verbs. In a first step, it is shown that the set of meanings associated with deontic adjectives is quite different from the set of meanings identified in the literature on modal verbs. Adjectives lack the directive meanings of obligation or permission, which are traditionally regarded as the core deontic categories, and they have semantic extensions towards non-modal meanings in the evaluative domain. In a second step, the analysis of adjectives is used to propose an alternative definition of deontic modality, which covers both the meanings of verbs and adjectives, and which can deal with the different extensions towards modal and non-modal categories. This is integrated into a conceptual map, which works both in diachrony – defining pathways of change – and in synchrony – accommodating refinements within each set of meanings.

This paper is a cross-linguistic study of counterfactuality in simple clauses, as in the English construction The police should have intervened. On the basis of a representative sample of languages, we investigate (i) how counterfactuality is most commonly marked, and (ii) what these patterns of marking can tell us about the nature and origins of counterfactuality. We first show that counterfactuality is most frequently marked by a combination of elements that have other functions in other contexts, rather than by one single ‘dedicated’ marker. Contrary to popular belief, neither past tense nor imperfective aspect is a universal feature in the combinations of markers used to signal counterfactuality: the only type of element that is found in every combination is a modal element marking some type of potentiality, which can be combined (i) with past tense markers, (ii) with a combination of past tense and aspectual (perfect or perfective) markers, or (iii) just with aspectual markers. On the basis of these findings about the marking of counterfactuality, we argue that counterfactuality typically originates as a semanticization of pragmatic information, more specifically an implicature derived from the compositional meaning of a combination of a modal element and a past, perfect or perfective element.

This collective volume focuses on the crucial role of formal evidence in recognizing and explaining instances of grammaticalization. It addresses the hitherto neglected issue of system-internal factors steering grammaticalization and also revisits formal recognition criteria such as Lehmann and Hopper's parameters of grammaticalization. The articles investigate developments of such phenomena as modal auxiliaries, attitudinal markers, V1-conditionals, nominalizers, and pronouns, using data from a wide range of languages and (in some cases) from diachronic corpora. In the process, they explore finer mechanisms of grammaticalization such as modification of coding means, structural and semantic analogy, changes in frequency and prosody, and shifts in collocational and grammatical distribution. The volume is of particular interest to historical linguists working on grammaticalization, and general linguists working on the interface between syntax, semantics and pragmatics, as well as that between synchrony and diachrony.

This paper compares the diachronic development of stance constructions containing a negative quantifier + chance (henceforth ‘no’ chance) with that observed for stance constructions featuring ‘no’ wonder, focusing on their formal and semantic-discursive properties. While these ‘no’ + noun strings differ in semantic type of attitudinal assessment, with ‘no’ wonder expressing mirative appraisal (cf. Gentens et al. 2016) and ‘no’ chance expressing deontic, epistemic or (non-attitudinal) dynamic meaning (cf. Van linden & Brems 2017), they are similar in showing both complement constructions (1a)-(2a) and adverbial uses (1b)-(2b), as well as setting up a discourse schema expressing both speaker attitude and discourse organization: the speaker uses the structures to assess a proposition (P), and motivates this assessment by an explicit justification (J). In (2b), however, the epistemic qualifier interacts with the modal marking in P, yielding the interpretation ‘no chance Hoddle learned…’

(1) (a) It’s no wonder [Norwegians hunt whale.]P [There’s nothing else left to catch.]J (WB) (Van linden et al. 2016: 385)
(b) [And his wife was an alcoholic]P, and no wonder, [if she knew what kind of man he was.]J (WB) (Gentens et al. 2016: 126)
(2) (a) She had been weeping, he could see that, but there was no chance [that she would cry now]P [because the apartment was filled with Agency staff […].]J (WB)
(b) You would have thought [Hoddle might have learned something during his time out of the game, that he might have quietly reflected on his past errors of judgment and resolved to tread a little more warily in future.]P No chance. [Within minutes, he had committed two classic blunders and reconfirmed the old belief that […].]J (WB)

‘No’ chance adverbials also show a different use, expressing an emphatic negative response to a question or another speech act (3), a use also observed for ‘no’ way (cf. Huddleston & Pullum 2002: 849; Davidse et al. 2014). Many cases of sentence-initial ‘no’ chance, however, do not function as adverbials, but are in fact elliptical clauses, combining with a range of complements formally much more diverse than with ‘no’ wonder, like to-infinitives and of V-ing complements.

(3) Whenever Nia suggests a name I always think of some tosser I knew when I was at school and say “No chance.” (WB)

While adverbial uses of ‘no’ wonder already appeared in Late Middle English, taking over the discourse-schematic properties of their clausal counterparts (Gentens et al. 2016), chance was borrowed into the language in Early Middle English (OED), with the earliest complement constructions observed in Early Modern English only (no adverbial uses yet), all in happenstance contexts, cf. the source constructions of the stance adverbials perhaps and maybe (López-Couso & Méndez-Naya 2017).
This paper will trace the diachronic development of ‘no’ chance structures based on the Penn Historical Corpora, the Corpus of Early Modern English Texts, and the Corpus of Late Modern English Texts 3.0. Synchronic data are drawn from WordbanksOnline (WB). Its synchronic-diachronic perspective will enable us to assess the relative explanatory power of Thetical versus Sentence Grammar (Kaltenböck et al. 2011) and primary versus secondary discourse status (Boye & Harder 2012).

Corpora
WordbanksOnline Corpus https://wordbanks.harpercollins.co.uk/
PPCME2: Kroch, A. & Taylor, A. (2000). The Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Middle English (PPCME2). Department of Linguistics, University of Pennsylvania. CD-ROM, second edition, release 4.
PPCEME: Kroch, A., Santorini, B. & Delfs, L. (2004). The Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Early Modern English (PPCEME). Department of Linguistics, University of Pennsylvania. CD-ROM, first edition, release 3.
CEMET: De Smet, Hendrik. 2013. Spreading Patterns: Diffusional Change in the English System of Complementation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 13-15.
CLMET 3.0: Diller, H., De Smet, H., Tyrkkö, J. 2011. A European database of descriptors of English electronic texts. The European English Messenger 19, 21-35.

References
Boye, Kasper and Peter Harder. 2012. A Usage-based Theory of Grammatical Status and Grammaticalization. Language 88: 1-44.
Davidse, Kristin, An Van linden, Jacob Lesage & Lot Brems. Negation, grammaticalization and subjectification: the development of polar, modal and mirative no way-constructions, ICEHL18, 14-18 July 2014, University of Leuven.
Gentens, Caroline, Ditte Kimps, Kristin Davidse, Gilles Jacobs, An Van linden & Lot Brems. 2016. Mirativity and rhetorical structure: The development and prosody of disjunct and anaphoric adverbials with ‘no’ wonder. In Gunther Kaltenböck, Evelien Keizer & Arne Lohmann (eds.), Outside the Clause. Form and function of extra-clausal constituents, 125-156 [Studies in Language Companion Series 178]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Huddleston, Rodney and Geoffrey Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kaltenböck, Gunther, Bernd Heine, and Tania Kuteva. 2011. On Thetical Grammar. Studies in Language 35: 848-893.
López-Couso, María José & Belén Méndez-Naya. From happenstance to epistemic possibility: Corpus evidence for the adverbialization of happenstance expressions. ICAME 38, Prague, 24-28 May 2017.
OED = Oxford English Dictionary Online. Oxford University Press.
Van linden, An & Brems, Lot. Talmy’s “greater modal system”: fitting in verbo-nominal constructions with chance(s). Seventh International Conference of the French Association for Cognitive Linguistics (AFLiCo 7). 31 May – 3 June 2017, University of Liège.

This corpus-based study focusses on constructions with the noun chance(s), which are at present polysemous. Firstly, within the modal domain, chance(s) combines with light verbs (be, have, get) to form dynamic (1), deontic, epistemic (2), and volitional verbo-nominal patterns (VNPs). (1)-(2) show grammaticalized uses, with chance(s) incorporated in a larger unit that is secondary vis-à-vis the propositional lexical material it modifies (cf. Boye & Harder 2012), which is coded in what is traditionally regarded as noun complement clauses.

(1) if he had a dropsy fit sitting there I wouldn’t have a chance to grab him because he goes that quick down. (WB) [I wouldn’t be able to grab ...]
(2) if you’re really interested in the course then chances are you’ll go out and buy the books (WB) [‘it is likely you …’]

Moreover, chance(s) is found in lexicalized expressions (e.g. take your chances) and “caused modality” expressions (cf. Talmy’s 2000 “greater modal system”), i.e. augmented event structures that add a (positive/negative) causative operator to a basic modal meaning, e.g. (3).

(3) While executing their children’s killers would not bring back their loved ones, it would at least act as a catharsis, giving all concerned a better chance to move on with their lives (WB) [‘enable; make it possible for them’]

Based on synchronic data from WordBanksOnline (WB), this study will provide detailed lexicogrammatical descriptions of VNPs with chance, verifying such decategorialization reflexes as determiner drop, reduction in adjectives, and loss of singular-plural contrast. Secondly, it will trace these constructions’ diachronic development based on the Penn Historical Corpora, the Corpus of Early Modern English Texts, and the Corpus of Late Modern English Texts 3.0.
A pilot study reveals that the earliest VNPs with chance(s) involve happenstance contexts, cf. (4), just like the source constructions of perhaps and maybe (cf. López-Couso & Méndez-Naya 2017).

(4)   my chaunce was to be att the recoverynge off his sone me lorde Russelle (PPCEME, 1500-1570) [It was my hap, fortune to …]

We will reconstruct the diachronic relations between this (now archaic, OED) happenstance construction and the (caused) modal constructions illustrated in (1)-(3), highlighting the role of negative polarity as trigger for the development of modal meaning, as has been reported for VNPs with (no) need (Van linden et al. 2011), (no) doubt (Davidse et al. 2015), and (no) wonder (Van linden et al. 2016).


Corpora
WordbanksOnline Corpus https://wordbanks.harpercollins.co.uk/
PPCME2: Kroch, A. & Taylor, A. (2000). The Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Middle English (PPCME2). Department of Linguistics, University of Pennsylvania. CD-ROM, second edition, release 4.
PPCEME: Kroch, A., Santorini, B. & Delfs, L. (2004). The Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Early Modern English (PPCEME). Department of Linguistics, University of Pennsylvania. CD-ROM, first edition, release 3.
CEMET: De Smet, Hendrik. 2013. Spreading Patterns: Diffusional Change in the English System of Complementation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 13-15.
CLMET 3.0: Diller, H., De Smet, H., Tyrkkö, J. 2011. A European database of descriptors of English electronic texts. The European English Messenger 19, 21-35.
References
Boye, K., & P. Harder. 2012. Grammatical Status and Grammaticalization. Language 88: 1–44.
Davidse, Kristin, Simon De Wolf & An Van linden. 2015. The development of (there/it is / I have) no doubt expressing modal and interactional meaning. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 16 (1): 25-58.
López-Couso, M. J. & Méndez-Naya, B. From happenstance to epistemic possibility: Corpus evidence for the adverbialization of happenstance expressions. ICAME 38, Prague, 24-28 May 2017.
OED = Oxford English Dictionary Online. Oxford University Press.
Talmy, L. 2000. Toward a Cognitive Semantics. Volume I. Concept Structuring Systems. Cambridge:, Massachusetts/London, England: The MIT Press.
Van linden, An, Kristin Davidse & Lot Brems. Have/be no need: the interaction between negation and modality in verbonominal pathways of change. ICHL 20, Osaka, 25-30 July 2011.
Van linden, An, Kristin Davidse & Lennart Matthijs. 2016. Miracles and mirativity: From lexical it’s a wonder to grammaticalised it’s no wonder in Old English. Leuvense Bijdragen - Leuven Contributions in Linguistics and Philology 99-100: 385-409.

This paper focusses on constructions with nouns that denote something unexpected or astonishing. Specifically, it will compare constructions with marvel (1) and surprise (2) with those with wonder (3)-(4), which have been described in Van linden et al. (2016) and Gentens et al. (2016). The paper concentrates on constructions with complement clauses, cf. (1)-(4), and distinguishes between lexical vs. grammatical uses of complement-taking predicate (CTP) clauses (cf. Boye & Harder 2007).
(1) So drastic a series of atrocities worried even Lord Burleigh, who compared them with the much-condemned Spanish activities in the Low Countries: “as things be altered it is no marvel the people have rebellions here, for the Flemings had not so much cause to rebel by the oppression of the Spaniards, as is reported to the Irish people” (WB)
(2) Tyson soon integrated into that environment and the authorities misguidedly believed he was being rehabilitated thanks to boxing. And it was no surprise when Tyson was released early to go to live with D'Amato permanently. (WB)
(3) It is a wonder to me that no one is laughing at the silly boots, but I suppose they have other worries at the moment, and so do I. (WB)
(4) After all the scaremongering since September 11 regarding good versus evil, with us or with the terrorists, it is no wonder Arab-phobia has hit new heights. (WB)
In (4), it is no wonder functions as a mirative qualifier, commenting on the complement proposition in terms of its (un)expectedness (cf. DeLancey 2001). Its meaning can be paraphrased by an expectation adverb such as of course (Simon-Vandenbergen & Aijmer 2007: 172). The speaker’s lack of surprise about the proposition Arab-phobia has hit new heights is justified by the after-PP. While the CTP-clause thus serves a grammatical (attitudinal and discourse-organizational) function (Gentens et al. 2016) in (4), in (3) it expresses lexical meaning. The CTP-clause it is a wonder to me conveys that the speaker is very surprised, with the that-clause containing the presupposed factive proposition that s/he is surprised about (cf. Davidse & Van linden Forthc.). In (2), it was no surprise expresses the speaker’s lack of surprise about the proposition in the when-complement. Note, however, that – unlike in (4) – this expression of lack of surprise is discourse-primary (e.g. it can be ‘addressed’ by ‘how much of a surprise was it?’) and thus shows lexical use (cf. Boye & Harder 2007). In (1) it is no marvel functions as a mirative qualifier in a rhetorical scheme similar to (4).
Using the British subcorpora of the Wordbanks Online corpus (WB), we will analyse 250 concordances of (no) marvel and surprise + complement clause, aiming for a qualitative and quantitative comparison with (no) wonder constructions (e.g. lexical vs. grammatical use, matrix predicate types (it BE/COME…), rhetorical schemata). In this way we hope to get a more fine-grained view of what seems to be a mirative paradigm in present-day English.
References
Boye, K. and P. Harder. 2007. Complement-taking Predicates: Usage and Linguistic Structure. Studies in Language, 31: 569–606.
Davidse, Kristin & An Van linden. Forthcoming. Revisiting ‘it-extraposition’: The historical development of constructions with matrices (it)/(there) be + NP followed by a complement clause. In Paloma Núñez-Pertejo, María José López-Couso, Belén-Méndez Naya & Javier Pérez-Guerra (eds.), Crossing Linguistic Boundaries: Systemic, Synchronic and Diachronic Variation in English. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
DeLancey, Scott. 2001. The mirative and evidentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 33(3): 369-382.
Gentens, Caroline, Ditte Kimps, Kristin Davidse, Gilles Jacobs, An Van linden & Lot Brems. 2016. Mirativity and rhetorical structure: The development and prosody of disjunct and anaphoric adverbials with ‘no’ wonder. In Gunther Kaltenböck, Evelien Keizer & Arne Lohmann (eds.), Outside the Clause. Form and function of extra-clausal constituents [Studies in Language Companion Series 178], 125-156. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Simon-Vandenbergen & Karin Aijmer. 2007. The Semantic Field of Modal Certainty: A Corpus-based Study of English Adverbs. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Van linden, An, Kristin Davidse & Lennart Matthijs. 2016. Miracles and mirativity: From lexical it’s a wonder to grammaticalised it’s no wonder in Old English. Leuvense Bijdragen – Leuven Contributions in Linguistics and Philology 99-100: 385-409.

Corpus
Collins Wordbanks Online corpus: https://wordbanks.harpercollins.co.uk/

This paper examines the diachronic development of constructions with nouns that denote something unexpected or astonishing. Specifically, it will compare constructions with marvel (1) and surprise (2) with those with wonder (3)-(4), which have been described in Van linden et al. (2016) and Gentens et al. (2016). The paper concentrates on constructions with complement clauses, cf. (1)-(4), and distinguishes between lexical and grammatical uses of complement-taking predicate (CTP) clauses (cf. Boye & Harder 2007).

(1) So drastic a series of atrocities worried even Lord Burleigh, who compared them with the much-condemned Spanish activities in the Low Countries: “as things be altered it is no marvel the people have rebellions here, for the Flemings had not so much cause to rebel by the oppression of the Spaniards, as is reported to the Irish people” (WB)
(2) Tyson soon integrated into that environment and the authorities misguidedly believed he was being rehabilitated thanks to boxing. And it was no surprise when Tyson was released early to go to live with D’Amato permanently. (WB)
(3) It is a wonder to me that no one is laughing at the silly boots, but I suppose they have other worries at the moment, and so do I. (WB)
(4) After all the scaremongering since September 11 regarding good versus evil, with us or with the terrorists, it is no wonder Arab-phobia has hit new heights. (WB)

In (4), it is no wonder functions as a mirative qualifier, commenting on the complement proposition in terms of its (un)expectedness (DeLancey 2001). It can be paraphrased by an expectation adverb such as of course (Simon-Vandenbergen & Aijmer 2007: 172), and thus serves a grammatical function (Gentens et al. 2016). The speaker’s lack of surprise about the complement proposition is justified by the after-PP. By contrast, in (3) it is a wonder to me conveys that the speaker is very surprised, with the that-clause containing the presupposed factive proposition that s/he is surprised about. The CTP-clause in (2) expresses the speaker’s lack of surprise about the proposition in the when-complement. Note that – unlike in (4) – the expressions of (lack of) surprise in (3) and (2) are discourse-primary (e.g. they can be ‘addressed’ by ‘how much wonder/(of a) surprise is/was it?’) and thus show lexical use (cf. Boye & Harder 2007). In (1) it is no marvel functions as a mirative qualifier like in (4). 
This paper aims to inventory the constructions with ‘wonder’ nouns in Present-day English, as well as to study their diachronic development, investigating how marvel and surprise came to compete with native wonder when borrowed into English after the Norman conquest. It will also examine to what extent grammatical CTP-clauses have been in paradigmatic contrast with juxtaposed and parenthetical clausal structures or adverbial structures (cf. Gentens et al. 2016), with adverbials of the form negation + noun (e.g. no way, no doubt) already entrenched in Early Modern English as a constructional template (cf. Davidse et al. 2015). Data will be drawn from the Penn-Helsinki Historical Corpora, the Corpus of Early Modern English Texts, the Corpus of Late Modern English Texts and WordBanksOnline (WB).

References
Boye, Kasper and Peter Harder (2007), Complement-taking Predicates: Usage and Linguistic Structure, Studies in Language 31, 569–606.
Davidse, Kristin, Simon De Wolf and An Van linden (2015), The development of (there/it is / I have) no doubt expressing modal and interactional meaning, Journal of Historical Pragmatics 16(1), 25–58.
DeLancey, Scott (2001), The mirative and evidentiality, Journal of Pragmatics 33(3), 369–382.
Gentens, Caroline, Ditte Kimps, Kristin Davidse, Gilles Jacobs, An Van linden and Lieselotte Brems (2016), Mirativity and rhetorical structure: The development and prosody of disjunct and anaphoric adverbials with ‘no’ wonder, in G. Kaltenböck, E. Keizer and A. Lohmann (eds), (2016), Outside the Clause. Form and function of extra-clausal constituents [Studies in Language Companion Series 178], Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 125–156.
Simon-Vandenbergen and Karin Aijmer (2007), The Semantic Field of Modal Certainty: A Corpus-based Study of English Adverbs, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Van linden, An, Kristin Davidse and Lennart Matthijs (2016), Miracles and mirativity: From lexical it’s a wonder to grammaticalised it’s no wonder in Old English, Leuvense Bijdragen – Leuven Contributions in Linguistics and Philology 99-100, 385–409.


Corpora
WordbanksOnline Corpus https://wordbanks.harpercollins.co.uk/
YCOE: Taylor, A., A. Warner, S. Pintzuk and F. Beths (2003), The York-Toronto-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Old English Prose, University of York.
PPCME2: Kroch, A. & Taylor, A. (2000), The Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Middle English (PPCME2), Department of Linguistics, University of Pennsylvania. CD-ROM, second edition, release 4.
PPCEME: Kroch, A., Santorini, B. & Delfs, L. (2004), The Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Early Modern English (PPCEME), Department of Linguistics, University of Pennsylvania. CD-ROM, first edition, release 3.
CEMET & CLMET: De Smet, Hendrik (2013), Spreading Patterns: Diffusional Change in the English System of Complementation, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 13–17.

Western Amazonian languages stand out in showing classifiers that – in addition to the well-established classifier environments – also appear as derivational devices on nouns (Payne 1987; Aikhenvald 2000; Seifart & Payne 2007). Since classifiers are commonly assumed to originate in nouns (Aikhenvald 2000), classifier languages confront us with an analytical problem in the domain of Binominal Naming Constructions (BNCs), i.e. how to distinguish between the derivational use of classifiers on nouns (1)-(2) and noun-noun compounds (3)-(4). The present paper addresses this problem on the basis of primary data collected on Harakmbut (isolate, Peru), e.g. (1) and (3), and Mojeño Trinitario (Arawak, Bolivia), e.g. (2) and (4), two unrelated (and not in contact) Western Amazonian languages. While Mojeño Trinitario will be shown to be a multiple classifier language with an extensive set of classifiers, Harakmbut turns out to show (a small set of) classifiers only, in fewer environments. Yet, both languages will appear to behave strikingly similarly in the domain of BNCs.

(1) classifier-derived nouns in Harakmbut
a) siro-pi metal-CLF:stick ‘knife’ (cf. Hart 1963: 1)
b) siro-pu’ metal-CLF:cylindrical;hollow ‘metal tube’ (cf. Hart 1963: 1)

(2) classifier-derived nouns in Mojeño Trinitario
a) yuk(u)-pi fire-CLF:long;flexible ‘candle’
b) wray(u)-'a chicken-CLF:oval ‘chicken egg’

(3) noun-noun compounds in Harakmbut
a) ndumba-kuwa forest-dog ‘bush dog’ (Helberg 1984: 252; Tripp 1995: 194)
b) äwït-ku giant.otter-head ‘giant otter’s head; person with giant otter’s head’

(4) noun-noun compounds in Mojeño Trinitario
a) mari-chóchoku stone-river.bank ‘stony riverbank’
b) paku-miro dog-face ‘dog’s face; person with dog’s face’

In this paper, we will discuss how noun-classifier derivation compares to noun-noun compounding at the phonological, prosodic, semantic and syntactic levels in both Harakmbut and Mojeño Trinitario. For example, noun-noun compounds consist of clear “Thing-roots” (Haspelmath 2012) in both languages, with one element being the morphosyntactic and semantic head. In noun-CLF formations, however, classifiers do not really denote a “thing”, but rather a shape or quality; they do not contain a head.
As a factor bearing on this analytical problem, we will show that in both languages the noun/classifier distinction is blurred by the fact that there is a class of nouns that share many features with the canonical classifiers. In both languages, these nouns refer to parts of entities, such as bodyparts, cf. (3b) and (4b), or plant parts. Morphologically, these are bound roots, which require affixation to obtain independent nominal status, specifically possessor prefixes in Mojeño Trinitario and (semantically empty) nominalizing prefixes in Harakmbut. Interestingly, in both languages such N-N compounds as (3b) and (4b) can be used as endocentric compounds in their literal sense, but they can also be used exocentrically to refer to a person whose (physical) characteristics resemble those of the referent of the endocentric compound. In Mojeño Trinitario, such exocentric uses take determiners for human referents, whereas neither component noun refers to a human entity (Harakmbut lacks any formal indication for such uses). More generally, we will examine to what extent these bound nouns can be analysed as incipient classifiers, and formulate diachronic hypotheses informed by our analysis of BNCs.
References
Aikhenvald, A.Y. 2000. Classifiers. A Typology of Noun Categorization Devices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hart, R. 1963. Semantic components of shape in Amarakaeri Grammar. Anthropological Linguistics 5 (9): 1-7.
Haspelmath, Martin. 2012. How to compare major word-classes across the world’s languages. UCLA Working Papers in Linguistics, Theories of Everything 17, Article 16. 109–130.
Helberg, H. 1984. Skizze einer Grammatik des Amarakaeri. PhD dissertation, Tübingen.
Payne, Doris L.1987. Noun Classification in the Western Amazon. Language Sciences 9 (1): 21-44.
Seifart, Frank & Doris Payne. 2007. Nominal classification in the North West Amazon: Issues in areal diffusion and typological characterization. International Journal of American Linguistics 73 (4): 381–387.
Tripp, R. 1995. Diccionario amarakaeri-castellano. Yarinacocha: Min. de Educación & SIL.

This paper, based on original fieldwork, focuses on two types of constructional effect of non-visual evidential marking in the underdescribed language Harakmbut, more specifically the Amarakaeri dialect spoken in the Madre de Dios district of Peru. Harakmbut is still considered as an unclassified (Amazonian) language (cf. Wise 1999: 307; WALS), although Adelaar (2000) has argued for a genetic link with the Brazilian Katukina family, which may be further linked to Macro-Jê.
A first type of constructional effect involves constructions with a first person Agent in which the use of non-visual evidential marking leads to an interpretation of involuntary action, cf. (2), an effect that as has been described before for a number of (other) Amazonian, Bodic (Sino-Tibetan), and Athapaskan languages, and Kolyma Yukaghir (DeLancey 1985; Curnow 2003; Maslova 2003; Aikhenvald 2004; see Fauconnier 2012). The non-visual evidential suffixes mark a shift away from the speaker, as s/he is signaled not to have witnessed the action denoted by the verb form in both (1) and (2). In (2) this causes a clash in interpretation, since the speaker is marked as not having witnessed an event s/he is presented to have directly participated in as an agent, and therefore to have first-hand knowledge of. (Note that in (2) the non-visual evidential  marker is fused with the distant past tense marker; -tuy is also grammatical in (1).) 

(1) O’-wek-uy-ate keme
3SG.IND-pierce-DIST.PST-NVIS tapir
‘He killed a tapir (long time ago).’ (speaker did not see it happen)
(2) Ih-arak-tuy keme
1SG.IND-kill-DIST.PST.NVIS tapir
‘I killed a tapir without realizing it (long time ago).’

The second type has – to my knowledge – not been discussed before. Specifically, finite forms of temporal verbs referring to the cycle of the sun (often subsumed under meteorological predications, e.g. in Malchukov & Siewierska 2011) invariably carry non-visual evidential marking in Harakmbut, although the events referred to are clearly visible to the speaker. An example is given in (3), which has present temporal reference (in earlier work on the language, evidential marking is argued to apply to the past domain only, cf. Helberg 1984: 277-279; Tripp 1995: 222). Incidentally, (3) also serves as a greeting used at dusk, and thus might rate as a fixed expression.

(3) o’-sik-ate
3SG.IND-black-NVIS
‘It is becoming dark.’

I will argue that both types of constructional effect can be explained in terms of endpoint emphasis, which has been proposed for effects like in (2) by DeLancey (1985): evidential marking that shifts away from the speaker implies that knowledge about the phases leading up to the endpoint of the event is not accessible, in (2) because the Agent is engaged non-voluntarily, and in (3) because impersonal constructions lack a clear Agent. The data used comprise audio recordings of elicitation sessions as well as a limited amount of spontaneous speech.


References
Adelaar, W. 2000. Propuesta de un nuevo vínculo genético entre dos grupos lingüísticos indígenas de la Amazonía occidental: Harakmbut y Katukina. In Actas del I Congreso de Lenguas Indígenas de Sudamérica, L. Miranda Esquerre (ed.), vol. 2, 219-236. Lima: U. Ricardo Palma.
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2004. Evidentiality. Oxford University Press.
Curnow, Timothy Jowan. 2003. Nonvolitionality expressed through evidentials. Studies in Language 27(1). 39–59.
DeLancey, Scott. 1985. Lhasa Tibetan evidentials and the semantics of causation. BLS 11. 65–72.
Fauconnier, Stefanie. 2012. Constructional effects of involuntary and inanimate Agents : A cross-linguistic study. PhD dissertation, University of Leuven.
Helberg, H. 1984. Skizze einer Grammatik des Amarakaeri. PhD dissertation, Tübingen.
Malchukov, Andrej & Anna Siewierska (eds.). 2011. Impersonal Constructions: A cross-linguistic perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Maslova, Elena. 2003. A grammar of Kolyma Yukaghir. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Tripp, Robert. 1995. Diccionario amarakaeri-castellano. Yarinacocha: Min. de Educación & SIL.
Wise, M. 1999. Small language families and isolates in Peru. In Dixon & Aikhenvald (eds.), The Amazonian languages, 307-340. Cambridge: CUP.

Argument marking in Harakmbut: The avoidance of transparent 1 <> 2 combinations

An Van linden, University of Leuven & Research Foundation Flanders – FWO


Native American languages show interesting features in the domain of argument marking, especially in 1 <> 2 pronominal combinations. These combinations often show fused, opaque, or unusually complex marking, which has been explained in terms of “pragmatic skewing” by Heath (1998), who draws a parallel with cross-linguistically recurrent pragmatic restrictions on the use of transparent 2SG pronominals (thou, tu, etc.), which may become “bluntly familiar”, and tend to be replaced by impersonal, third-person, or morphological 2PL forms in polite discourse (1998: 84). This paper focuses on the morphosyntactic patterns of argument marking in the underdescribed language Harakmbut (more specifically the Amarakaeri dialect spoken in the Madre de Dios district of Peru), and it concentrates on effects of pragmatic skewing in 1 <> 2 combinations. Harakmbut is still considered as an unclassified (Amazonian) language (cf. Wise 1999: 307; WALS), although Adelaar (2000) has argued for a genetic link with the Brazilian Katukina family, which may be further linked to Macro-Jê.
The data available in the literature (Tripp 1995; Helberg 1984, 1990) and my own fieldnotes suggest that Harakmbut formally distinguishes between three mood types, each of which has a distinct set of argument markers, cross-referenced on the (finite) verb. It has a primary object system, with transitive contexts showing cross-referencing of (applied or direct) O-arguments, while in ditransitive contexts it is the Goal-argument that is cross-referenced, in addition to the A-argument. The system shows person hierarchy effects ({1, 2} > 3) and accusative alignment in mixed and non-local configurations (A(>3)-markers = S-markers). In addition, Harakmbut shows considerable pragmatic skewing in 1<>2 pronominal combinations, as shown in examples (1)-(4).

Harakmbut (Amarakaeri dialect)
(1) o-ning-to-chak-me-ne purak
1<>2SG/1.PL.INCL(>3)-BEN-SOC-come-REC.DIR.EVD-IND cacique
‘We brought you (SG) a cacique (type of passerine bird).’ OR ‘I brought you (SG) a cacique.’ OR ‘You (SG) brought me a cacique.’ OR ‘You (SG) brought us a cacique.’ OR ‘We (INCL) brought him/her a cacique.’
(2) on-ta-mba-to-chak-me-ne e-mamboya
1<>2PL-POSS-hand;leaf.CLF-SOC-come-REC.DIR.EDV-IND NMLZ-photograph
‘We brought your (PL) pictures.’ OR ‘I brought your (PL) pictures.’ OR ‘You (PL) brought my pictures.’ OR ‘You (PL) brought our pictures.’

As can be seen in (1)-(2), the 1 <> 2 pronominal prefixes show a number of strategies to avoid referential transparency, which have been noted by Heath (1998: 85-86) for other native American languages as well, such as the use of unanalysable portmanteaus, neutralization of the number distinction for 1st person, and syncretism of the 1<>2SG and 1PL.INCL(>3) forms. Within the imperative paradigm, this last strategy is not used, but instead the prefixes show neutralization of the person distinction for 2nd and 3rd person, as shown in (3)-(4). 

(3) Mbe-chaway-∅!
2/3SG>1SG-see-2.IMP
‘Look at me!’
(4) Mbe’-yok-e’ tare!
2/3SG>1SG-give-3.IMP manioc
‘He/she should give me manioc!’

While in the imperative forms, the ambiguity of the A-argument is resolved by the markers in the suffix slot (see (3)-(4)), the indicative (and dubitative) forms can only take recourse to case-marked free pronouns to disambiguate examples like (1)-(2). This paper also aims to investigate the factors determining the distribution of these optional free pronouns in spontaneous discourse.


References

Adelaar, W. 2000. Propuesta de un nuevo vínculo genético entre dos grupos lingüísticos indígenas de la Amazonía occidental: Harakmbut y Katukina. In Actas del I Congreso de Lenguas Indígenas de Sudamérica, L. Miranda Esquerre (ed.), vol. 2, 219-236. Lima: U. Ricardo Palma.
Heath, Jeffrey. 1998. Pragmatic Skewing in 1 ↔ 2 Pronominal Combinations in Native American Languages. International Journal of American Linguistics 64 ( 2): 83-104.
Helberg, H. 1984. Skizze einer Grammatik des Amarakaeri. PhD dissertation, Tübingen.
Helberg, H. 1990. Análisis functional del verbo amarakaeri. In R. Cerrón Palomino & G. Solís Fonseca (eds.), Temas de lingüística amerindia, 227-249. Lima: Concytec.
Tripp, Robert. 1995. Diccionario amarakaeri-castellano. Yarinacocha: Min. de Educación & SIL.
Wise, M. 1999. Small language families and isolates in Peru. In Dixon & Aikhenvald (eds.), The Amazonian languages, 307-340. Cambridge: CUP.

This paper investigates the paths of grammaticalization and semantic change that led from structures with lexical uses of way to grammatical operators containing ‘no’ way that convey polar, modal and mirative meanings. Preliminary analysis of data from the OED, the Penn Corpora of Historical English, the Corpus of Late Modern English (CLMET), Wordbanks (WB) and the Corpus of American Soap Operas suggests the following main lines of development, which will be further detailed on the basis of extensive qualitative and quantitative data-analyses.
The earliest grammaticalization path yielded emphatic adverbial negators of the forms noneways (13th C) and no way (14th C), via bridging contexts allowing both a lexical ‘in no manner’ and grammatical ‘not at all’ meaning, as in (1).

(1) How miʒte þei mon of synne make clene? Certis, no wey, as hit is sene. (c1325 Cursor Mundi)

In Late Modern English, a new grammaticalization cycle recruited in no way which numerically took over as negator in the same structural contexts as no way, e.g.

(2) these things need not be specially forced upon him. In no way should he be led to emphasize them (CLMET)

A different and more recent grammaticalization path has, via bridging contexts such as (3), where a reading of situation- or participant-inherent impossibility can be inferred, led to verbo-nominal expressions (Loureiro-Porto 2010) of modality, which in Present-day English express mainly dynamic (cf. 3), but also epistemic (4) and deontic meanings (Saad et al. 2012). 

(3) he … thanked her rather shortly, but said there was no way of managing it. (CLMET)
(4) There's no way it was a domestic murder. (WB)

In a final semantic shift, which can be related to the two main grammaticalization paths, no way acquires mirative value, i.e. the conveying of surprise, roughly paraphrasable as ‘I can’t believe …’, which may either be blended with negation or modality, or form the sole meaning (5). Mirative no way relates both to the proposition and the interaction between the speech participants.

(5) … a figure appeared by the side of the road. ‘A hitchhiker!’ said Ellie excitedly. ‘Yeah, no way,’ said Julia. (WB)

This paper seeks to explain the semantic shifts in light of the conceptual relations (Lesage 2013) between the negation of propositions, whose “function … is … to emphasize that a fact is contrary to expectation” on the part of the hearer (Wason 1965: 7, cf. Werth 1999), modality, the speaker’s evaluation of the likelihood or desirability of a state-of-affairs, and mirativity, surprise regarding a fact that thwarts the speaker’s expectations (Peterson 2013). We will verify Lesage’s (2013) hypothesis that the development of no way involves a gradual increase in subjectivity (Narrog 2012) and discourse-orientation.

Keywords

grammaticalization, subjectification, negation, modality, mirativity

References
Lesage, Jakob. 2013. Surprise and modality, negation and subjectification: Mirative functions of no way. Unpublished term paper. Linguistics department, KU Leuven.
Loureiro-Porto, Lucía. 2010. “Verbo-nominal Constructions of Necessity with þearf n. and need n.: Competition and Grammaticalization from OE to eModE.” English Language and Linguistics 14 (3): 373–397.
Narrog, Heiko. 2012. Modality, Subjectivity, and Semantic Change: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 
Peterson, Tyler. 2013. “Rethinking Mirativity: The Expression and Implication of Surprise”. University of Toronto. http://semanticsarchive.net/Archive/2FkYTg4O/Rethinking_Mirativity.pdf.
Saad, Khalida, Wouter Parmentier, Lot Brems, Kristin Davidse, and An Van Linden. 2012. “The Development of Modal, Polar and Mirative No Way-constructions”. Paper presented at ICAME 33, 31 May-5 June, University of Leuven.
Wason, Peter Cathcart. 1965. “The Contexts of Plausible Denial.” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 4 (1): 7–11.
Werth, Paul. 1999. Text Worlds: Representing Conceptual Space in Discourse. Textual Explorations. London: Longman.

In this paper we are concerned with the development of grammaticalized uses of expressions with no wonder, which qualify propositions miratively (Chafe 1986) as being very ‘unsurprising’. As is the case with other negation + noun-strings, no wonder occurs in Present-Day English in comment clauses (Brinton 2008) and adverbials. The clauses can take complementizers that, why, if as in (1).

(1) Just think of all the vested interests in competitions. It’s no wonder that/ why /if scandal so often clouds sport.

The adverbials can qualify clauses they have structurally in their scope (2), but they can also qualify propositions that are ‘presupposed’ by clausal ellipsis (Halliday & Hasan 1976: 216), and on which subordinate clauses depend that explain why the proposition is unsurprising (3).

(2) The relatives were very annoyed, no wonder, and it caused friction in the family. (WB)
(3) That Martin Hobbs is a bundle of nerves. And no wonder [presupposed ‘he is a bundle of nerves’] with the life he's led. (WB)

Much of this variation, which we will systematically describe on the basis of a 500 token sample from WordbanksOnline, seems motivated by the cohesive and argumentative relations no wonder construes and which often have both backward and forward pointing dimensions.
With regard to their diachronic development, we start from the hypothesis that the clausal and adverbial expressions resulted from largely distinct paths, with the adverbials not necessarily deriving via ellipsis from the clausal constructions. (Such distinct paths were also found for the development of clausal and adverbial qualifiers with no question by Davidse & De Wolf forthc.)
A preliminary look at data from the OED and historical corpora reveals that subjectless matrices such as (no) wonder is and ‘extraposition’ constructions with matrices like it is no/ not any/ small/ a/ great wonder are attested from the early 11th century on. On the basis of exhaustive extractions from the Helsinki corpus and the Corpus of Late Modern English, we will reconstruct how the positive and negative polarity values of these matrices developed and crystallized, as well as their different complementizers (that, if, though, why). The emergence of parenthetical comment clause will also be traced. We expect a history of multiple local changes, extensions but also disappearances (e.g. of complementizer though).
Adverbial uses appeared at the beginning of the 15th c. In contrast with the clausal structures, adverbial uses are found with negative polarity value only, which can be expressed by no/ small/ little or what:

(4) And others (harder still) he paid in kind. Dryden alone (what wonder?) came not nigh (CLMETEV, 1710-1780)

Our hypothesis is that the adverbials emerged mainly via analogy with the set of adverbials instantiating the schema negation + noun, which were already entrenched in Early Modern English. These included the French loan saunz doute, no doubt, without doubt, out of doubt and no way.
If these hypotheses are confirmed, the motivation behind the different development of  comment clauses and adverbials might lie in the more intricate and more ‘persistent’ (Breban 2009) grammatical relations defining a complex sentence as source construction. By contrast, the schematic structure of an adverbial modifying a clause can more readily be adopted by a functionally suitable unit. While the adverbials do not appear to derive directly from the clausal structures by ellipsis, more indirect semantic and pragmatic interactions between the two can be assumed.

References

Brinton, L. 2008. The Comment Clause in English. Syntactic Origins and Pragmatic Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Breban, T. 2009. Constructional persistence: a case based on the grammaticalization of English adjectives of difference. English Language and Linguistics 13: 77-96.
Chafe,W. 1986. Evidentiality in English conversation and academic writing. In W. Chafe & J. Nichols (eds), Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology, Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 261–272.
Davidse, K. & S. De Wolf. Forthc. Lexicalization and grammaticalization: the development of idioms and grammaticalized expressions with no question.
Halliday, M.A.K. & R. Hasan. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.

In contrast with the spate of diachronic studies of modal verbs, the acquisition of modal meaning by verbonominal expressions has been neglected. Yet, Loureiro-Porto’s (2010: 373) study of be/have plus need/ðearf n. argues that they are “key to the understanding of the necessity verbs”. Studies of verbonominal expressions with no doubt (Simon-Vandenbergen 2007) and no question (De Wolf & Davidse 2010) have revealed interesting interactions between (nominally expressed) negation and modal meanings, with lexicalization of the strings often preceding their grammaticalization.
In this paper, we will reconstruct the changes that led to the current modal uses of expressions containing be/have + negative determiner + nouns need, nedðearf, ðearf, mister:

(i) absence of subject- or situation-inherent need (dynamic)
(ii) absence of obligation (deontic)
(iii) prohibition (deontic)

(i) and (ii) are already attested in OE, e.g. þe nis nan neod (c950–c1010), and counterfactuals of (i) in ME it hadde ne noe nede to make siche feestis (1380). The origin of (iii) and its current proclivity to counterfactuality, as in he had no need to say that, remain to be investigated, as well as the possibility of these expressions conveying absence of logical necessity (epistemic).
Taking the formal and semanticopragmatic flexibility of the – often subjectless – strings in OE as startingpoint, we will map out the development of this modal subsystem (cf. Van linden forthc., also for the corpora consulted). We will take a diachronic constructional approach, paying attention to change at the level of the specific lexicogrammatical construct, which may feed into the formation of micro- and meso-constructions, and distinguishing between lexicalization and grammaticalization (Traugott 2008). The semantic paths followed will be confronted with existing hypotheses about the development of modal meanings.

References
De Wolf, S. & K. Davidse. 2010. No question: lexicalization and grammaticalization in the development of modal qualifier constructions. Paper GRAMIS 2010, Brussels.
Loureiro-Porto, L. 2010. Verbonominal constructions of necessity with þearf n. and need n.: competition and grammaticalization from OE to eModE.  Englis Language and Linguistics 14: 373-397.
Simon-Vandenbergen, A.M. 2007. No doubt and related expressions. A functional account.’ M. Hannay & G. Steen (eds) Structural-functional studies in English grammar: in honour of Lachlan Mackenzie. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Traugott, E. 2008. Grammatikalisierung, emergente Konstructionen und der Begriff der “Neuheit”. K. Fischer & A. Stefanowitsch (eds) Konstruktionsgrammatiek II: Von der Konstruction zu Grammatik. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. 5-32.
Van linden, A. forthc. Modal adjectives: English deontic and evaluative constructions in diachrony and synchrony. Berlin: Mouton.

This paper proposes to distinguish between two types of adjectival deontic expressions (like with appropriate or crucial), viz. SoA-related and speaker-related uses. In general, deontic expressions are taken to involve assessments of States of Affairs (SoAs) in terms of (moral) desirability (cf. Verstraete 2005; Nuyts 2005, 2006). The following examples show that such expressions can function on two distinct levels, either relating to the real world (SoA-related), as in (1), or relating to the speaker’s argumentative goals (speaker-related), as in (2). The same observation has been made for other linguistic categories that (may) have a modal flavour, such as interclausal relations (e.g., Davies 1979: 146–176; Sweetser 1990: 76–112; Verstraete 2007: ch. 9).

(1) TONY Blair's Drug Czar Keith Hellawell admitted last night it would be ‘pie in the sky’ for him to pledge the creation of a totally drug-free Britain. But he insisted it was vital to warn kids of the perils they face. He said: “Children as young as five need to understand the consequences that drugs have. It's crucial we get to them before the drug dealers do.” (CB, sunnow)
(2) Therefore missionary translations appealed to the very roots of these societies, touching the springs of life and imagination in real, enduring ways. Perhaps it was to this phenomenon that Pliny the Younger referred in his letter to the Emperor Trajan, namely, that Christian renewal also transforms while stimulating older habits and attitudes. Whatever the case, it would be appropriate to conclude this section of our discussion with a closer clarification of the vernacular issue in Christian missionary translation, and do this in two interconnected stages. (CB, ukbooks)

In (1) the SoAs that are assessed as desirable clearly relate to the real world: warning children about the dangers of drugs before they are exposed to drug dealers is something that can only be carried out in the extra-linguistic world. In (2), by contrast, the SoA assessed as desirable relates to text structure, and the deontic expression as a whole serves the speaker’s argumentative goals: it indicates that the speaker has finished the body of the text and now proceeds to the conclusion. This type of speaker-related use will be termed the ‘text-building’ use.
In addition to the monologic type of text-building uses illustrated in (2), I will also distinguish a second, more dialogic type of speaker-related use, viz. the ‘mental focus’ use, illustrated in (3) below.

(3) In Dr Penelope Leach's presentation, she described the state of marriage as “very fragile and impoverished”. I invited her to elaborate on that. I think it's impoverished and fragile because we're asking or expecting one man and one woman, fairly much in isolation from extended family, to be everything to each other - to be each other's friend, brother, lover, husband, father, supporter, companion - the lot. And I think it's quite important to realise that this isn't the way marriage and family have been in the West for very long, and not the way they are over most of the world. (CB, bbc)

In (3), the speaker uses the deontic expression to encourage the hearer to focus mentally on a particular propositional content. In contrast to the text-building use, I will show that this speaker-related type has specific formal properties. Most notably, it involves a combined pattern of complementation, viz. a to-clause complemented by a that-clause. Specifically, I will argue that this second type can be conceived of as a partially filled construction in the sense of Goldberg (1995), with important as its model adjective.
This study analyses the semantic distinctions illustrated above, and traces their distribution in deontic expressions with 22 adjectives, drawing on data from the Cobuild Corpus. It involves qualitative as well as quantitative analyses, which are based on samples that are either exhaustive or consist of 200 examples per adjective. It also includes a multiple distinctive collexeme analysis (cf. Gries and Stefanowitsch 2004), which is based on exhaustive samples of extraposed to-clauses with the same 22 adjectives.

References:
DAVIES, EIRIAN C. 1979. On the semantics of syntax: Mood and condition in English. London: Croom Helm. — GOLDBERG, ADELE. 1995. Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure (Cognitive theory of language and culture). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. — GRIES, STEFAN & ANATOL STEFANOWITSCH. 2004. Extending collostructional analysis: a corpus-based perspective on 'alternations'. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 9.1: 97-129. — NUYTS, JAN. 2005. The modal confusion: On terminology and the concepts behind it. In Alex Klinge and Henrik Høeg Müller (eds.), Modality: Studies in form and function. London: Equinox. 5–38. — NUYTS, JAN. 2006. Modality: Overview and linguistic issues. In Frawley (ed.). 1–26. —SWEETSER, EVE. 1990. From Etymology to Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. — VERSTRAETE, JEAN-CHRISTOPHE. 2005. Scalar quantity implicatures and the interpretation of modality. Problems in the deontic domain. Journal of Pragmatics 37 (9): 1401–1418. — VERSTRAETE, JEAN-CHRISTOPHE. 2007. Rethinking the coordinate-subordinate dichotomy: Interpersonal grammar and the analysis of adverbial clauses in English (Topics in English Linguistics 55). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Factors of information structure such as new versus given subjects have been shown to play a major role in the choice between that-clauses and to-infinitives as complements of verbs (Noël 1997, 2003). This paper deals with differences in information structure manifested by that- versus to-complements that depend on adjectival matrices, specifically those which occurred in subjectless constructions in Old English (OE) and in constructions with subject it – so-called “extraposition” constructions – from Middle English (ME) onwards (Van linden & Davidse 2009). Van linden (2008) established that the complementation of such adjectival matrix clauses expressing ‘desirability’ shifted from a predominance of that-clauses in OE to one of to-infinitives in ME (a development parallel to that of complements of verbs with a volitional element described by Los 2005). In this paper we propose that this can at least partly be explained in terms of the changing information constraints of English (Los 2008).
We will concentrate on the informational salience of the subject, as a preliminary study by Van linden (2008) has shown that the proportion of informationally low subjects in the that-complements decreased significantly from OE to Late Modern English (LModE). We will systematically investigate the changes in the distribution of subjects low or high in informativity across the complement types of adjectival matrices expressing desirability, such as necessary, good and important (and their historical counterparts). In the case of that-clauses and for + NP to-infinitives, which code the subject explicitly, informationally distinct nominal expressions will be distinguished in terms of the principles formulated by Ariel (1990: 31). In the case of the to-complements, which do not have explicit subjects, the central distinction is between subjects with implied generalized or arbitrary reference and contextually identifiable subjects. This will allow us to assess the hypothesis that, diachronically, the subject function can be seen to react to the new informational pressures on it, starting in ME (Los 2008).


References

Ariel, Mira. 1990. Accessing noun-phrase antecedents. London/New York: Routledge.
Los, Bettelou. 2005. The rise of the to-infinitive. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Los, Bettelou. 2008. Syntax and information structure in interaction: the loss of verb-second in English and its consequences. Paper presented at ISLE 1, 8-11 October, Freiburg.
Noël,  Dirk. 1997. The choice between infinitives and that-clauses after believe. English Language and Linguistics 1(2): 271-284.
Noël, Dirk. 2003. Is there semantics in all syntax? The case of accusative and infinitive constructions vs. that-clauses. In Günter Rohdenburg and Britta Mondorf (eds.), Determinants of grammatical variation in English (Topics in English Linguistics 43). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 347–377.
Van linden, An. 2008. The rise of the to-infinitive: Evidence from adjectival complementation. Preprint n° 273 Linguistics Department, KULeuven.
Van linden, An and Kristin Davidse. 2009. The clausal complementation of deontic-evaluative adjectives in extraposition constructions: a synchronic-diachronic approach. Folia Linguistica 43.1: 175–217.

In Noël (1997, 2003) it was shown that factors of information structure such as new versus given subjects play a major role in the choice between that-clauses and to-infinitives as complements of utterance, cognition and perception verbs. This paper also deals with differences in information structure manifested by that- versus to-complements, but ones that depend on another type of matrix and for whose changes in distribution diachronic explanations will be sought. More specifically, we will investigate the complements of matrices with deontic adjectives which occurred in subjectless constructions in Old English (OE) and in constructions with subject it – so-called “extraposition” constructions – from Middle English (ME) onwards (Van linden & Davidse 2009), as illustrated by (1) and (2) respectively.

(1) He andwyrde; Nis na god þæt man nyme his bearna hlaf
He answered; not.is not good that one take.PR.SUBJ his of.children bread
and awurpe hundum;
and throw.PR.SUBJ for.dogs
‘He answered: “It is not good that one should take the bread of his children and throw it to the dogs”’ (YCOE 990–1010 ÆCHom II, 8 67.16)
(2) And Crist answeride and seyde “Hit is not good to take þe breed þat falluþ to children,
and yuen hit to howndes to ete fro þese children.”
‘And Christ answered and said: “It is not good to take the bread that belongs to children from these children, and give it to dogs to eat.”’ (PPCME ?a1425 Wycl.Serm. (Add 40672) 401)

Van linden (2008) established that the complementation of such adjectival matrix clauses expressing ‘desirability’ shifted from a predominance of that-clauses in OE to one of to-infinitives in ME (a development parallel to that of complements of verbs with a volitional element described by Los 2005). In this paper we propose that this change in distribution can at least partly be explained in terms of the changing information constraints of English (Los 2008).
We will concentrate on the informational salience of the subject, as a preliminary study by Van linden (2008) has shown that the proportion of informationally low subjects in the that-complements decreased significantly from OE to Late Modern English (LModE). For instance, whereas subjects with generalized reference such as man (‘one’) were used in about 18% of cases of that-clauses in OE (cf. example 1), they had disappeared from them in LModE, when this type of subject was conveyed by to-complements with implied subjects having generalized or arbitrary reference (cf. Los 2005: 290–293 on verbal complements). By the same token, the proportion of informationally high subjects in that-clauses increased, from, for instance, 14% of subject NPs with common noun head in OE to 44% in LModE.
In this paper, we will systematically investigate the changes in the distribution of subjects low or high in informativity across the complement types of adjectival matrices expressing desirability, such as good, proper, essential and their historical counterparts. We will focus this study on three complement types found with these adjectives, viz. that-clauses, for + NP to-infinitives, and to-infinitives, as these will allow us to chart more fine-grained diachronic movements.  In the case of that-clauses and for + NP to-infinitives, which code the subject explicitly, informationally distinct nominal expressions will be distinguished in terms of the principles formulated by Ariel (1990: 31), according to whom the informativity and phonological size of nominals are oppositely proportionate to their accessibility. For instance, non-contrastive pronouns have low informativity and phonological size, but code highly activated referents. In the case of the to-complements, which do not have explicit subjects, the central distinction is between subjects with implied generalized or arbitrary reference and contextually identifiable subjects. This will allow us to assess if, in what periods, and to which degree
i. that-complements repelled informationally lower types of subject NPs;
ii. for ... to-complements attracted them;
iii. to-complements took over functions of informationally low subjects by having implied subjects with generalized reference;
iv. that-complements attracted informationally heavy NP subjects in contrast with for ... to-complements.
More generally, it should also allow us to assess the hypothesis that, diachronically, the subject function can be seen to react to the new informational pressures on it, starting in ME (Los 2008).
The data used in this study will consist of the complement taking instances of a set of deontic adjectives found in the following corpora: the York-Toronto-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Old English Prose (YCOE) for OE, the Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus for ME and EModE ((PPCME and PPCCEME), the Corpus of Late Modern English Texts (Extended version) (CLMETEV) for LModE, and the British subcorpora of the Collins COBUILD Corpus (CB).


References
Ariel, Mira. 1990. Accessing noun-phrase antecedents. London/New York: Routledge.
Los, Bettelou. 2005. The rise of the to-infinitive. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Los, Bettelou. 2008. Syntax and information structure in interaction: the loss of verb-second in English and its consequences. Paper presented at ISLE 1, 8-11 October, Freiburg.
Noël,  Dirk. 1997. The choice between infinitives and that-clauses after believe. English Language and Linguistics 1(2): 271-284.
Noël, Dirk. 2003. Is there semantics in all syntax? The case of accusative and infinitive constructions vs. that-clauses. In Günter Rohdenburg and Britta Mondorf (eds.), Determinants of grammatical variation in English (Topics in English Linguistics 43). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 347–377.
Van linden, An. 2008. The rise of the to-infinitive: Evidence from adjectival complementation. Preprints of the Department of Linguistics 273. Department of Linguistics, University of Leuven.
Van linden, An and Kristin Davidse. 2009. The clausal complementation of deontic-evaluative adjectives in extraposition constructions: a synchronic-diachronic approach. Folia Linguistica 43.1: 175–217.

In the (merely formal) description of adjectives that control clausal complements, Biber et al. (1999: 671–83) include the adjectives appropriate, crucial, essential, fitting, proper, and important in the class that can take either that-clauses or to-clauses. From a functional perspective, as these adjectives all have a deontic flavour, one could expect their clausal complements to be mainly of the type expressing ‘desired action’ (Wierzbicka 1988; Halliday 1994), such as in (1) (on the development of deontic meaning, see Van linden, Verstraete & Cuyckens forthcoming).

(1) It is essential to consult a doctor or clinic before using any of the rhythm methods, because the procedures must be carefully learned (CB)

However, Present-day English corpus data suggest that all these adjectives in EC take, besides a majority of desired action complements, also some propositional complements, such as in (3) below. This raises a number of questions: (i) do the proposition complements correlate with a different meaning of the adjective than the desired action complements? (ii) are these two types of complements diachronically related, and if so, in what way? (iii) how does the historical development of the complementation of these adjectives relate to the tendency attested for verbal predicates in earlier stages of English (Los 2005: 171–190), in which that-clauses are gradually superseded by to-infinitives?

This paper intends to chart the formal and functional distribution of clausal complements with the six adjectives mentioned above, drawing on data from the Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Early Modern English (PPCEME), Corpus of Late Modern English Texts (CLMET) (De Smet 2005), Lancaster-Bergen-Oslo Corpus (LOB), and Cobuild Corpus (CB). Firstly, the relative frequency and the formal realization of the desired action complements will be studied throughout successive historical stages. Secondly, the development of the propositional complements with these six adjectives will be traced.  Preliminary research suggests that typically the first step is a combined pattern: a to-infinitive of a cognition or verbalization predicate is followed by a propositional that-clause, e.g.,

(2) Now it is important to notice, that in November, the time of greatest speculation, the quantity in the market was held by few persons, and that it frequently changed hands, each holder being desirous to realize his profit. (CLMET 1780-1850)

In a second step the cognition or verbalization predicate may be dropped, but is still in some sense implied, e.g.,

(3) [I]t’s important that the NEC is now dominated by members of the Shadow Cabinet. (CB)

However, this trajectory does not seem to account for a second micro-construction with propositional complement, found with proper, appropriate, and fitting. 

(4) Sir Elton performed the open air gig free after Prime Minister Tony Blair approached him personally. Many fans came simply to say thanks to the singer, who stood by the Province [i.e., Ulster] during the dark days of the Troubles. It was fitting that they should gather at the castle where the historic peace pact was thrashed out. (CB)

The development of this pattern and its interaction with the meaning of the adjectives should also be clarified. In any case, this study shows that the development of that- versus to-complements cannot be explained satisfactorily in purely formal terms, but is better approached in terms of the correlation between functional notions such as desired action and proposition and their formal realization.
References
Biber, D., S. Johansson, G. Leech, and R. Quirk. 1999. Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.
De Smet, H. 2005. A corpus of Late Modern English texts. Icame Journal 29: 69–82.
Halliday, M. A. K. 1994. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. Second edition. London: Arnold.
Los, B. 2005. The rise of the to-infinitive. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 
Van linden A., J.-C. Verstraete, and H. Cuyckens. Forthcoming. The semantic development of essential and crucial: Paths to deontic meaning. English Studies.
Wierzbicka, A.  1988.  The semantics of grammar.  Amsterdam: John Benjamins Company.

In the description of clausal complements controlled by adjectives, most reference grammars make only a formal distinction between that-clauses and to-clauses (e.g., Quirk et al. 1985: 1220–31; Biber et al. 1999: 671–83; 716–22). However, if these complements are looked at from a functional angle, the picture becomes more complex. In particular, the that-clauses may realize either (i) a proposition, a piece of information about whose validity speaker and hearer can argue (Halliday 1994: 70), e.g.,

(1) [I]t’s important that the NEC is now dominated by members of the Shadow Cabinet. (CB)

or (ii) a desired action, an action assessed as desirable by the speaker or another entity, e.g.,

(2) It is important that the woman be the one who is in charge of the entire process. (CB)
(3) It is important that the information we collect is as accurate as possible. (CB)

To-complements always seem to realize desired actions, e.g.,

(4) The Cowboys believe it is important to have licensed premises at a central location in addition to their headquarters. (CB)

In this paper we want to chart the formal and functional distribution of clausal complements with the adjective important, drawing on data from the diachronic Corpus of Late Modern English Texts (CLMET) (De Smet 2005) and the synchronic Cobuild Corpus (CB). How do formal features such as to-infinitive, subjunctive, indicative or modal VP relate to the distinction between proposition and desired action? What are the relative frequencies in historical and present-day data of these two functional patterns? What rhetorical, illocutionary and attitudinal values (McGregor 1997: 239–44) do they express with regard to their complements? Do they form two distinct constructional schemata, or have they influenced each other?
Of particular interest here is the mixed pattern in which a to-complement with a mental predicate (note, remember, realise, etc.) is followed by a proposition, e.g.,

(5) It is important to realise that in these times of fast change it can be dangerous to let things drift. (CB)

Whilst the desirability of the mental act is certainly an element of the semantics of (5), the matrix plus mental to-complement seems to have conventionalised into a larger constructional unit with its own semantics and pragmatics, and the pattern as a whole functionally bears more resemblance to the pattern with proposition in (1). The diachronic data even suggest that the latter developed from the mixed pattern in the course of the 19th century. 

References:
Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, and Randolph Quirk. 1999. Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.
De Smet, Hendrik. 2005. A corpus of Late Modern English texts. Icame Journal 29: 69–82.
Halliday, M.A.K. 1994. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. Second Edition. London: Arnold.
McGregor, W. 1997. Semiotic Grammar. Oxford: Clarendon.
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and David Crystal. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.

This thesis analyses the clausal complementation patterns of adjectives that express non-epistemic modal meanings, from a synchronic and a diachronic perspective. It uses this analysis to refine traditional definitions of deontic modality, which are mainly based on the study of modal verbs, and elucidates how it relates to other domains within and beyond modality. Examples of the constructions studied are given in (1) to (4).

(1) There had followed a nightmare procession along the sewer for what felt like and doubtless was several miles. For the first part of their journey it was necessary to move doubled up, in a position of almost unbearable discomfort. After what seemed at least an hour but was probably ten minutes they reached mercifully, a larger, higher sewer tunnel and could move upright. (CB, ukbooks)
(2) Herbert Daniels, the group's founder, believes that it is essential to overcome the social stigma of Aids, which often means that people with the virus lose their homes, jobs and families, and are effectively condemned to death by society. (CB, bbc)
(3) The years immediately after the Second World War were particularly scarred by the loss of many fine men who had survived the great hazards of conflict only to lose their lives at the very cutting edge of aeronautical research and development. I believe it would be wholly appropriate to record all their names and achievements together for posterity at some honoured place. (CB, ukmags)
(4) It may be known as the Royal Opera House but this was ballet's night. On February 20, 1946, it was the ballet that reopened Covent Garden after the war with a performance of The Sleeping Beauty. So it was right and proper that on Tuesday, 50 years to the day later, the historic reawakening of one of the world's great houses should be marked by the ballet again, and with Sleeping Beauty. (CB, times)

In particular, I argue that the adjectival constructions with extraposed that- and to-clauses express three types of meaning, with a set of adjectives showing a pattern of polysemy not attested with modal verbs:
(i) situational dynamic necessity (cf. Nuyts 2006: 4), as in (1),
(ii) deontic modality in the sense of Nuyts et al. (2010), involving potential states of affairs, as in (2) and (3),
(iii) non-modal evaluative meaning, a new type introduced in this study, involving attitudinal assessments of propositional contents, as in (4).
The distribution of the adjectives studied across these three conceptual types is found to be lexico-semantically conditioned. In this respect, a basic distinction is assumed between two semantically coherent classes of adjectives, viz. weak and strong ones, which can be made on intuitive grounds in the sense that necessary and essential in (1) and (2), for example, express a stronger degree of necessity or desirability than appropriate and proper in (3) and (4) (cf. Övergaard 1995: 85; Huddleston and Pullum 2002: 997). Strong adjectives are found to be polysemous between meanings (i) and (ii), (cf. (1)-(2)) (much like modal verbs), whereas weak ones are polysemous between meanings (ii) and (iii), (cf. (3)-(4)) (unlike modal verbs). These conceptual and lexical distinctions have been integrated into a conceptual map, which forms the backbone of the thesis. Within each of the three conceptual categories in the map (cf. (i)-(iii)), analysis of Present-day English corpus data suggests a number of subtypes, some of which correlate with clear constructional patterns, and qualify as partially filled constructions in the sense of Goldberg (1995).
Besides a description of the synchronic data, the thesis also comprises a substantial diachronic component, drawing on data from various historical corpora. It shows that the three conceptual categories in the map are diachronically related; the map thus also defines pathways of change. Case studies of non-Germanic strong adjectives such as essential and crucial show that these first developed dynamic meaning from their original non-modal meaning, and later on deontic meaning through subjectification of the dynamic meaning (cf. Traugott 1989). A case study of non-Germanic weak adjectives shows that they first occurred in deontic expressions and later developed non-modal evaluative meaning through bridging contexts. In addition to the diachronic relations between the three categories, this study also focuses on the types of complementation the deontic-evaluative adjectives pattern with, across the various historical periods. It traces the development of that-clauses and to-infinitive constructions, and it also concentrates on the distribution of these two types in the extraposition construction and its forerunner, the subjectless construction. It is shown that the adjectival constructions witness a rise of the to-infinitive at the expense of the subjunctive that-clause in the Middle English period, as has also been observed for verbal matrices by Los (2005). This change in distribution is explained by analogy with the verbal constructions. Unlike with these last types, the to-infinitive with adjectival matrices stabilizes at roughly a 3:1 ratio to the that-clause from Early Modern English onwards. For these later periods, finally, I propose that the clausal variation may be motivated by lexical determination and discourse factors such as information structure.

References:
Goldberg, A. 1995. Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: UCP.---- Huddleston, R. & G. Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: CUP.---- Los, B. 2005. The rise of the to-infinitive. Oxford: OUP.---- Nuyts, J. 2006. Modality: Overview and linguistic issues. In W. Frawley (ed.), The expression of modality. Berlin: Mouton. 1–26.---- Nuyts, J., P. Byloo, & J. Diepeveen. 2010. On deontic modality, directivity, and mood: The case of Dutch mogen and moeten. Journal of Pragmatics 42 (1), 16–34.---- Övergaard, G. 1995. The mandative subjunctive in American and British English in the 20th century. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell.---- Traugott, E.C. 1989. On the rise of epistemic meanings in English: An example of subjectification in semantic change. Language 65 (1): 31–55.

This review evaluates Mindt’s (2011) monograph, which presents a corpus-driven study of adjectives followed by that-clauses in present-day British English. Drawing on an analysis of more than 50,000 examples from the British National Corpus (BNC), Mindt addresses a number of problems in grammatical analyses and descriptions of adjectival constructions. As briefly explained in Chapter 1, these pertain to (i) the classification of adjectives complemented by that-clauses, (ii) constructions with objects occurring between the verb and the adjective (e.g. Labour made it clear that ...), (iii) constructions with result clauses (e.g. the answer is so obvious that ...), (iv) the relation between the semantics of the adjective and the verb form in the that-clause, and (v) the omission of that. Crucially, the study does not impose any restrictions in terms of syntax or semantics to include or exclude cases, which is a true merit. The book consists of 9 chapters, each of which is discussed in detail in the review.

This chapter presents a description of Harakmbut, an Amazonian language spoken in Southeast Peru, based on existing work as well as original fieldwork. It focusses on its most vital dialect, Arakmbut (Amarakaeri). The discussion of its phonology and phonetics highlights nasality as an important – yet not fully understood – phenomenon. The chapter also presents morphological templates for both (pro)nominal heads and finite verb forms. The description of the noun phrase revolves around the distinction between obligatorily bound nouns and potentially free ones, which leads to distinct morpho-syntactic behaviour in noun modification, noun incorporation and word formation. Contra earlier work, I argue that just a limited number of bound nouns (rather than the whole class) should be analysed as classifiers. The discussion of the verb phrase homes in on the lack of referential transparency in person marking, as well as the abundance of inflectional and derivational morphology, including markers of associated motion and temporal adverbial markers. In the system of argument marking on dependents, the three argument roles (S, A and O) show differential and/or optional marking. At the level of clause-linking, nominalization plays an important role in the expression of relative, complement and adverbial relations.

This article describes verb-based nominalization strategies in Harakmbut, an endangered language spoken in the Peruvian Amazon. Earlier studies and my own fieldnotes suggest that verb-based nominalization falls into two formal types, which can be distinguished on the basis of the prefix used. Both formal subtypes can be used for participant nominalization as well as event nominalization, with the latter function encompassing the coding of relative, complement and adverbial relations. Further generalizations that can be made pertain to the internal and external syntax of the nominalized forms. While all types of participant nominalization show NP-like external syntax, only one type shows some internal syntax, which turned out to be NP-like. By contrast, event nominalizations are found to combine NP-like external syntax with verb-like internal syntax, irrespective of their formal subtype.