. Introduction Background Evidence of low do Further consequences Conclusion Three-way competition and the emergence of do -support in English Aaron Ecay University of Pennsylvania July , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. The phenomenon of do -support Grammar competition Cross-linguistic relevance Further consequences Summary of evidence Argument structure Adverb position Co-ocurrence with other auxiliaries Evidence of low do Relationship of data from parsed corpora and Ellegård Theories of the origin of do -support Background Introduction Introduction Table of contents Conclusion Further consequences Evidence of low do Background Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. Conclusion change? (on both these points, see Warner ) entire trajectory? puzzles remain Introduction The phenomenon of do -support do -support? Further consequences Evidence of low do Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ▶ A syntactic change took place aer : ▶ V → T raising lost ▶ auxiliary do used in “last resort” contexts (which would otherwise demand V → T movement) ▶ Well studied quantitatively since Ellegård (), though ▶ why does the change not follow an S-shaped curve through its ▶ what is the relevance of social factors to the grammatical ▶ what is the relevance of affirmative declarative do to
. Conclusion change? (on both these points, see Warner ) entire trajectory? puzzles remain Introduction The phenomenon of do -support do -support? Further consequences Evidence of low do Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ▶ A syntactic change took place aer : ▶ V → T raising lost ▶ auxiliary do used in “last resort” contexts (which would otherwise demand V → T movement) ▶ Well studied quantitatively since Ellegård (), though ▶ why does the change not follow an S-shaped curve through its ▶ what is the relevance of social factors to the grammatical ▶ what is the relevance of affirmative declarative do to
. The origin of do -support causative: () (ME) causative construction For he makth serche all the contree do -support Introduction Conclusion So he ded smyte of his hed Further consequences Evidence of low do Background () . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ▶ Various theories have been adduced regarding the origin of ▶ Ellegård proposed that do -support arose from a Middle English ▶ Different ME dialect areas used different lexical items for the PPCME, CMCAPCHR-M4,98.2054 PPCME, CMMANDEV-M3,127.3087
. Introduction . make . do . Causative . . western speakers, for whom do could not be a causative reanalysis as auxiliary constructions Dialect contact and do -support Conclusion Further consequences Evidence of low do Background Distribution of ME causatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ▶ When the causee is not overt, these are susceptible to ▶ Thus, tokens of eastern do were reanalyzed as auxiliaries by
. Introduction favor of the hypothesis that causatives are the origin of as well as facts that provide at least circumstantial evidence in . do acquires its modern distribution . do becomes an auxiliary . do causatives spread at the expense of others . do is one among many causatives Causative origin Conclusion Further consequences Evidence of low do Background do -support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ▶ Ellegård’s hypothesis was extended by Denison () ▶ “I am proposing four phases” (p. ) ▶ We will see evidence that this articulation into stages is correct,
. Neg. Imp. Neg. Q. PPCEME+PCEEC Type N Aff. Decl. Aff. Imp. Neg. Decl. Aff. Q. Neg. Decl. Neg. Imp. Neg. Q. Introduction do -support tokens; the parsed corpora of relevant time periods Background Evidence of low do Further consequences Conclusion Ellegård and the corpora Aff. Q. offer a sample of comparable (but smaller) size. Ellegård Type N Aff. Decl. Aff. Imp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ▶ Ellegård () had a deliberately collected corpus of
. N . . . . Year . Proportion do -support . . . . . Corpus . Parsed corpora . Ellegård . . . Introduction . Background Evidence of low do Further consequences Conclusion Differences between the two datasets deliberate collection techniques of Ellegård. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Neg. Decl. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ▶ The two corpora differ in some details, perhaps due to the
. Introduction Background Evidence of low do Further consequences Conclusion Similarities between the two corpora general picture of the trajectory of do -support. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ▶ In spite of their differences, the two corpora paint the same
. . . . Year . Proportion do . n . . . . . . Neg. Q. . Neg. Imp. . Neg. Decl. Aff. Q. . . Type . . Introduction . Background Evidence of low do Further consequences Conclusion Similarities between the two corpora general picture of the trajectory of do -support. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ellegård’s data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ▶ In spite of their differences, the two corpora paint the same
. . . . . n . . Proportion do . Year . . . Neg. Q. . Neg. Imp. . Neg. Decl. Aff. Q. . . Aff. Decl. . Type . . . Introduction . Background Evidence of low do Further consequences Conclusion Similarities between the two corpora general picture of the trajectory of do -support. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PPCEME + PCEEC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ▶ In spite of their differences, the two corpora paint the same
. Introduction Background Evidence of low do Further consequences Conclusion Waypoint Evidence of low do Co-ocurrence with other auxiliaries Adverb position Argument structure Summary of evidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. Introduction Background Evidence of low do Further consequences Conclusion Sources of evidence Three pieces of evidence support the existence of low do : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ▶ do ’s co-occurrence with other auxiliaries ▶ the placement of adverbs relative to do and other auxiliaries ▶ the behavior of do in the absence of an external argument
. Examples with duplicated causative: ‘Great plenty of wine that the Christian men have made.’ gret plentee of wyn þat the cristene men han don let make b. (Chaucer Canterbury Tales “The Squire’s Tale” c. ) his city.’ ‘He had the feast of his birthday cried throughout Surrey, Don cryen thurghout Sarray his citee, He leet the feste of his nativitee a. () Introduction Coocurrences Conclusion Further consequences Evidence of low do Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (PPCME, CMMANDEV,47.1161 a. )
. Coocurrences demonstrates that do has been bleached of its causative (Chaucer, Canterbury Tales “Summoner’s Tale” c. ) And thus he dide don sleen hem alle three. a. Example with duplicated do : () Conclusion Introduction Further consequences Evidence of low do Background meaning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. Introduction (Chaucer, Canterbury Tales “Summoner’s Tale” c. ) And thus he dide don sleen hem alle three. a. Example with duplicated do : () Coocurrences Conclusion Further consequences Evidence of low do Background meaning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ▶ demonstrates that do has been bleached of its causative
. He hes done petuously devour demonstrates that do is merged lower than T, and lower than (A. Boorde Introduction of Knowledge a. ) ‘Consequently it [barley] will make good drink’ consequently it wyll do make goode drynke a. Example with modal: () (Wm. Dunbar “Lament for the Makars” c. ) of makars [=bards]’ ‘[Death] has petuously devoured the noble Chaucer, flower the noble Chaucer of makaris flour a. Introduction Example with have : () Coocurrences Conclusion Further consequences Evidence of low do Background the head which hosts have (= Asp) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Recommend
More recommend
