ON A CERTAIN NOMINAL USE OF BECAUSE-CLAUSES: JUST BECAUSE BECAUSE-CLAUSES CAN SUBSTITUTE FOR THAT-CLAUSES DOES NOT MEAN THAT THIS IS ALWAYS POSSIBLE

Abstract

This paper is concerned with the grammatical construction exemplified by the sentence used as the subtitle, Just because because-clauses can substitute for that-clauses does not mean that this is always possible, where the because-clause is used as a nominal clause. It is shown that, syntactically, this construction derives from the blending of a construction with a that-clause as subject and one with an adverbial because-clause, and that, semantically, the construction is used to deny the inferential process of drawing a certain conclusion from a certain factual premise and to express some doubt about the validity of the conclusion as well. Through a close investigation of this particular construction and some related matters, it is suggested that the syntax of a grammatical construction is constrained in such a way that the construction is used for exactly the purpose it is expected to serve.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 46 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.