Eunmi Kim
Department of Linguistics, Languages, and Cultures, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA
This study traces the grammaticalization processes that lead to the paradigm of cause-encoding prepositions. The objectives of this paper are (i) to trace the emergence of cause from the prepositions by, at, with, and about; (ii) to examine the mechanisms and principles in their grammaticalization processes; and (iii) to account for their unidirectional semantic changes. Using the synchrony-for-diachrony approach within grammaticalization theory and historical data from various sources, this study investigates the developmental trajectories of prepositions from their original meanings to causality. Grammaticalization theory allows for the investigation of phenomena observed in diachronic developments of cause-encoding prepositions, including mechanisms for semantic change and grammaticalization principles. This paper argues that context-induced reinterpretations and subjectification are the key driving forces in the grammaticalization processes of these prepositions . This suggests the development involves a gradual conceptual transfer within the same domain grounded in conversational inferences. The grammaticalization path of cause markers demonstrates the emergence of a new paradigm through gradual metonymic processes and analogy due to their semantic and functional similarity. The prepositions take on a new function as cause markers within the domain of correlation, influenced by pragmatic inference, which results in the parallel development of these prepositions. Considering that all their source lexemes are related to spatial proximity, the development of cause markers from prepositions may be attributable to their origins.
[1] Dirven, R., 1995. The construal of cause: The case of cause prepositions. In: Taylor, J.R., Maclaury, R.E. (eds.). Language and the Cognitive Construal of the World. Mouton de Gruyter: Berlin, Germany. pp. 82–95.
[2] Dirven, R., 1997. Emotions as cause and the cause of emotions. In: Niemeier, S., Dirven, R. (eds.). The Language of Emotions: Conceptualization, expression, and theoretical foundation. John Benjamins: Amsterdam, The Netherlands. pp. 55–83.
[3] Kim, E., 2018. Persistence of spatial meanings in the conceptualization of causality: at, by, with, and about in emotion constructions. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics. 54(2), 223–254.
[4] Osmond, M., 1997. The prepositions we use in the construal of emotion: why do we say fed up with but sick and tired of? In: Niemeier, S., Dirven, R. (eds.). The Language of Emotions: Conceptualization, Expression, and Theoretical Foundation. John Benjamins: Amsterdam, The Netherlands. pp, 111–133.
[5] Bolinger, D., 1984. Surprise. In: Raphael, L.J., Raphael, C.B., Valdovinos, M.R. (eds.). Language and Cognition: Essays in Honor of Arthur J. Bronstein. Plenum Press: New York, NJ, USA. pp. 45–58.
[6] Iglesias Rábade, L., 2011. Semantic Erosion of Middle English prepositions. Peter Lang: Frankfurt, Germany.
[7] Lundskær-Nielsen, T., 1993. Prepositions in Old and Middle English. John Benjamins: Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
[8] Heine, B., Claudi, U., Hünnemeyer, F., 1991a. Grammaticalization: A Conceptual Framework. The University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA.
[9] Traugott, E.C., Dasher, R.B., 2002. Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK.
[10] Langacker, R.W., 2008. Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK.
[11] Rhee, S., 2023. Intertwined grammaticalization, degrammaticalization, and pragmaticalization: The case of ppwun ‘share’ in Korean. Lingua. 291, 103559. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2023.103559
[12] Bybee, J., 2015. Language change. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK.
[13] Heine, B., 1994. Auxiliaries: Cognitive Forces and Grammaticalization. Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK.
[14] (The) Oxford English Dictionary. Available from https://www.oed.com (cited 10 May 2024).
[15] Bosworth, J., Toller, T.N. (eds.). Bosworth-toller Anglo-Saxon Dictionary. Available from: https://bosworthtoller.com (cited 10 May 2024).
[16] Dictionary of Old English. Available from https://doe.artsci.utoronto.ca (cited 10 May 2024).
[17] Middle English Compendium. Available from https://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/middle-english-dictionary/dictionary (cited 10 May 2024).
[18] Barcelona, A., 2000. Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads. Mouton de Gruyter: Berlin, Germany. pp. 109–132.
[19] Kranich, S., 2010. Grammaticalization, subjectification, and objectification. In: Kranich, S., Stathi, K., Gehweiler, E., König, E. (eds.). Grammaticalization: Current views and issues. John Benjamins: Amsterdam, The Netherlands. pp. 101–122.
[20] Traugott, E.C., 1989. On the rise of epistemic meanings in English: An example of subjectification in semantic change. Language. 65, 31–55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/414841
[21] Traugott, E.C., König, E., 1991. The semantics-pragmatics of grammaticalization revisited. In: Traugott, E.C., Heine, B. (eds.). Approaches to Grammaticalization, vol. 1. John Benjamins: Amsterdam, The Netherlands. pp. 189–218.
[22] Traugott, E.C., 2010. (Inter)subjectivity and (inter)subjectification: A reassessment. In: Davidse, K., Vandelanotte, L., Cuyckens, H. (eds.). Subjectification, Intersubjectification, and Grammaticalization. Mouton de Gruyter: Berlin, Germany. pp. 29–72.
[23] Cuyckens, H., 1984. “At”-A typically English preposition. Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics. 19, 49–64.
[24] Rhee, S., 2002b. Grammaticalization of a-derivative prepositions in English. The Journal of Linguistic Science. 21, 133–156.
[25] Kim, E., 2022. Prepositions with and about and schematic conceptualization of emotion causality. English Studies. 103(1), 138–153. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0013838X.2021.1997470
[26] Rhee, S., 2002a. Semantic changes of English preposition against: A grammaticalization perspective. Language Research. 38(2), 563–583.
[27] Kim, E., 2016. Causality-encoding of at and by in emotion constructions in English. Australian Journal of Linguistics. 37(1), 1–18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07268602.2016.1169974
[28] Hopper, P.J., 1991. On some principles of grammaticalization. In: Traugott, E.C., Heine, B. (eds.). Approaches to Grammaticalization, vol. 1. John Benjamins: Amsterdam, The Netherlands. pp. 17–35.
[29] Heine, B., Kuteva, T., 2002. World Lexicon of Grammaticalization. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK.
[30] Moessner, L., 1989. Early Middle English syntax. Niemeyer: Tubingen, Germany.
[31] Heine, B., 1997. Cognitive Foundations of Grammar. Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK.
[32] Heine, B., 2002. On the role of context in grammaticalization. In: Wischer, I., Diewald, G. (eds.). New Reflections on Grammaticalization. John Benjamins: Amsterdam, The Netherlands. pp. 83–101.
[33] Frajzyngier, Z., 2008. Grammaticalization, typology, and semantics: Expanding the agenda. In: López-Couso, M.J., Seoane, E. (eds.). Rethinking Grammaticalization: New Perspectives. John Benjamins: Amsterdam, the Netherlands. pp, 239–264.
[34] Davies, M. Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA). Available from https://www.english-corpora.org/coca/ (cited 3 January 2025).
[35] Kortmann, B., 1991. Free Adjuncts and Absolutes in English: Problems of Control and Interpretation. Routledge: London, UK.
[36] Traugott, E.C., Trousdale, G., 2013. Constructionalization and Constructional Changes (Vol. 6). Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK.
[37] Lakoff, G., Johnson, M., 2003. Metaphors We Live By. University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA.
[38] Rhee, S., 2007. On interrelation of instrumental and ablative. Discourse and Cognition. 14(3), 131–153.
[39] Heine, B., Claudi, U., Hünnemeyer, F., 1991b. From Cognition to Grammar: Evidence from African Languages. In: Traugott, E.C., Heine, B. (eds.). Approaches to Grammaticalization, Vol. 2. John Benjamins: Amsterdam, The the Netherlands. pp. 149–187.
Copyright © 2025 Eunmi Kim
This is an open access article under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) License.
