Grammaticalization paths of periphrastic 'do'- constructions

Abstract

This study demonstrates cross-linguistic parallels in the grammaticalization of ‘do’-auxiliaries in periphrastic verb constructions. Such constructions are exemplified by the phenomenon of ‘do’-support in English, where they are obligatory in interrogative and negative clauses. Similar phenomena can be attested across a wide range of genetically and typologically diverse languages. The auxiliary in periphrastic ‘do’-constructions is derived from a ‘schematic action ’ verb that can either be directly associated with a specific function, or it appears in the clause as a consequence of other grammatical factors. Based on a sample of 200 languages I will argue that periphrastic ‘do’-constructions become grammaticalized in a limited range of grammatical context after going through a stage of optional usage, and also that direct expression of a verbal category by a ‘do’-auxiliary represents a possible final stage of grammaticalization of the ‘schematic action’-verb. The verbal categories expressed by such an element are restricted to a subsection of tense, aspect and mood. If in a given language the use of a ‘do’-auxiliary has become obligatory in association with other functions, the auxiliary will not grammaticalize further and continues as a semantically bleached dummy element. Tense, aspect and mood are therefore the only functional domains in which ‘do’-auxiliaries can become grammaticalized as meaningful elements.

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 — 18 citations exist upstream.

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