Grammaticalization as Conventionalization of Discursively Secondary Status: Deconstructing the Lexical–Grammatical Continuum

Abstract

Abstract Despite intense research on grammaticalization, no satisfactory definition has so far been proposed. Some would argue that it is indeed impossible to come up with a precise definition as grammaticalization is an epiphenomenon. After pointing out problems in existing definitions, this article proposes a new definition of grammaticalization as a distinct kind of change. The definition is based not only on the theory of the lexical–grammatical distinction in Boye & Harder (2012), but also on a rejection of the definition of grammaticalization offered there. The proposal is that grammaticalization is a distinct kind of conventionalization: the conventionalization of discursively secondary status. It is argued that in addition to avoiding problems intrinsic to earlier definitions, this definition captures canonical and non‐canonical cases of grammaticalization, and allows us to be precise about what to include and what not to include under grammaticalization. Finally, three important implications are discussed. (1) Grammaticalization is not a type of overall change, but rather one part of overall changes that simultaneously include other aspects. (2) Grammaticalization involves gain rather than loss. (3) A lexical–grammatical continuum does not exists, but grammaticalization is bound up with other continua, including: a social‐level conventionalization continuum, a splitting continuum and a discourse prominence continuum.

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 — 20 citations exist upstream.

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