Abstract :
[en] This corpus study focuses on transitive structures that contain generic/indefinite O-arguments in Present-day English, cf. (1) featuring things and (2) featuring folks, and investigates to what extent these show reduced transitivity and backgrounded discourse status in the sense of Hopper and Thompson (1980). As can be observed in (1) and (2), the constructions studied show a high degree of transitivity on most of the transitivity parameters proposed in Hopper and Thompson (1980), apart from the individuation of the O-argument. For example, (1) and (2), score high in terms of kinesis, volitionality, agency and affirmation, but their O-arguments have generic reference. In addition, the constructions examined generally form part of backgrounded discourse. In (1) and (2), rather than pushing the story-line further, the structures render descriptions of a person’s character and behaviour that make them eligible for a specific task or job.
(1) Iyad Allawi is strong and tough with a hard edge. He’ll make things better. (USnews)
(2) The fact that he cut such a handsome figure tended to make folks forget that he didn’t know it all. He looked and acted like a man destined for great things, and most people tend to be swayed by a man’s opinion of himself. (USbooks)
More generally, the data suggest that in the constructions studied, the noun phrases coding O-participants merely function as filler elements, used to satisfy the argument-structure requirements imposed by the verb. In view of them realizing non-individuated O-arguments in backgrounded stretches of discourse, we propose that the structures focused on could be analysed as emergent (Hopper 1991) antipassive constructions, which won’t necessarily develop into canonical antipassive constructions over time. In fact, there is a good chance that they will never shed overt expression of the (original) O-argument.
In addition to things and folks, this study examines the nouns people, stuff and shit(s) in the role of O-participant, thus factoring in an animacy variable (animate people, folks versus inanimate things, stuff and shit(s)), as well as a register variable (neutral people, things versus informal to slang folks, stuff, and shit(s)). Specifically, the queries used allowed for up to two intervening words between any verb form and the noun studied; for each noun 250 relevant examples were analysed, drawn from random samples from the US subcorpora of WordBanksOnline.
References
Hopper, P. 1991. On some principles of grammaticization. In Traugott & Heine (eds), Approaches to Grammaticalization, vol. 1: Focus on Theoretical and Methodological Issues, 17-35. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hopper, P. & S.A. Thompson. 1980. Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language 56 (2): 251-299.
