Abstract
Speakers may use language creatively because they want to be extravagant, or because they need to communicate content for which no conventional coding solution exists. In addition, however, there is a third motivation for creativity that is both more fundamental and less conspicuous. Speakers are creative because their mental access to linguistic resources is limited and variable – a factor referred to here as ‘availability.’ In this paper, corpus data from the spoken British National Corpus and from the Hansard Corpus are used to show that speakers of English use the morphological pattern of -ly-adverb formation (as in correctly, locally, poorly etc.) more creatively when they have recently heard or used another -ly-adverb. This manifests itself in higher type frequencies – hence, more varied forms – for -ly-adverbs. The effect can be ascribed to priming, and indicates that the creative use of a linguistic resource depends on factors that facilitate mental access to it.
Acknowledgements
For their helpful comments on earlier versions of this paper, I would like to thank Thomas Hoffmann, the editors of Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik, and one anonymous reviewer, as well as the participants of the Creativity and Construction Grammar workshop held in Eichstätt in September 2017.
Works Cited
Adams, Michael (1999). “Another Effing Euphemism.” American Speech 74, 110–112.Search in Google Scholar
Bergs, Alexander (2018). “Learn the Rules like a Pro, so you can Break them like an Artist (Picasso): Linguistic Aberrancy from a Constructional Perspective.” Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 66.3, 277–293.10.1515/zaa-2018-0025Search in Google Scholar
Burke, Isabelle Grace (2014). “‘Giving a Rat’s’ about Negation: The Jespersen Cycle in Modern Australian English.” Australian Journal of Linguistics 34, 453–485.10.1080/07268602.2014.929085Search in Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. (2003). “Mechanisms of Change in Grammaticalization: The Role of Frequency.” Brian D. Joseph, ed. The Handbook of Historical Linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell, 602–623.10.1002/9780470756393.ch19Search in Google Scholar
Croft, William (2010). “The Origins of Grammaticalization in the Verbalization of Experience.” Linguistics 48, 1–48.10.1515/ling.2010.001Search in Google Scholar
De Smet, Hendrik (2008). “Functional Motivations in the Development of Nominal and Verbal Gerunds in Middle and Early Modern English.” English Language and Linguistics 12, 55–102.10.1017/S136067430700250XSearch in Google Scholar
De Smet, Hendrik (2013). Spreading Patterns: Diffusional Change in the English System of Complementation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199812752.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
De Smet, Hendrik (2016). “How Gradual Change Progresses: The Interaction between Convention and Innovation.” Language Variation and Change 28, 83–102.10.1017/S0954394515000186Search in Google Scholar
De Smet, Hendrik and Freek Van de Velde (2017). “Experimenting on the Past: A Case Study on Changing Analysability in English -ly-Adverbs.” English Language and Linguistics 21, 317–340.10.1017/S1360674317000168Search in Google Scholar
Foolen, Ad. (2012) “The Relevance of Emotion for Language and Linguistics.” Ad Foolen, Ulrike M. Lüdtke, Timothy P. Racine and Jordan Zlatev, eds. Moving Ourselves, Moving Others: Motion and Emotion in Intersubjectivity, Consciousness and Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 347–368.10.1075/ceb.6.13fooSearch in Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin (1999). “Optimality and Diachronic Adaptation.” Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 18, 180–205.10.1515/zfsw.1999.18.2.180Search in Google Scholar
Hawkins, John A. (2004). Efficiency and Complexity in Grammars. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199252695.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd and Tania Kuteva (2005). Language Contact and Grammatical Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511614132Search in Google Scholar
Hoey, Michael (2005). Lexical Priming: A New Theory of Words and Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Hoffmann, Thomas (2018). “Creativity and Construction Grammar: Cognitive and Psychological Issues.” Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 66.3, 259–276.10.1515/zaa-2018-0024Search in Google Scholar
Jäger, Gerhard and Anette Rosenbach (2008). “Priming and Unidirectional Language Change.” Theoretical Linguistics 34, 85–113.10.1515/THLI.2008.008Search in Google Scholar
Johanson, Lars (2002). “Contact-Induced Change in a Code-Copying Framework.” Mari C. Jones and Edith Esch, eds. Language Change: The Interplay of Internal, External and Extra-linguistic Factors. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 285–313.10.1515/9783110892598.285Search in Google Scholar
Keller, Rudi (1990). Sprachwandel. Von der unsichtbaren Hand in der Sprache. Tübingen: Francke.Search in Google Scholar
Los, Bettelou (Forthcoming). “‘Permissive’ Subjects and the Decline of Adverbial Linking in the History of English.” Hubert Cuyckens, Hendrik De Smet, Liesbet Heyvaert and Charlotte Maekelberghe, eds. Explorations in Historical Syntax. John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.198.02losSearch in Google Scholar
Ogura, Mieko and William S.-Y. Wang (1996). “Snowball Effects in Lexical Diffusion: The Development of -s in the Third Person Singular Present Indicative in English.” Derek Britton, ed. English Historical Linguistics 1994: Papers from the 8th International Conference on English Historical Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 119–141.10.1075/cilt.135.10oguSearch in Google Scholar
Pawley, Andrew and Frances H. Syder (1983). “Two Puzzles for Linguistic Theory: Nativelike Selection and Nativelike Fluency.” Jack Richards and Richard W. Smith, eds. Language and Communication. London: Longman, 191–226.Search in Google Scholar
Plank, Frans (2004). “Inevitable Reanalysis: From Local Adpositions to Approximative Adnumerals, in German and wherever.” Studies in Language 28, 165–201.10.1075/sl.28.1.07plaSearch in Google Scholar
Rendle-Short, Johanna (2009). “The Address Term Mate in Australian English: Is it still a Masculine Term?” Australian Journal of Linguistics 29, 245–268.10.1080/07268600902823110Search in Google Scholar
Rosemeyer, Malte and Scott Schwenter (2017). “Entrenchment and Persistence in Language Change: The Spanish Past Subjunctive.” Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 1–38. [Epub ahead of print].10.1515/cllt-2016-0047Search in Google Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg (2017). “Linguistic Entrenchment and its Psychological Foundations.” Hans-Jörg Schmid, ed. Entrenchment and the Psychology of Language Learning: How We Reorganize and Adapt Linguistic Knowledge. Boston: APA, 435–452.10.1037/15969-020Search in Google Scholar
Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt (2006). Morphosyntactic Persistence in Spoken English: A Corpus Study at the Intersection of Variationist Sociolinguistics, Psycholinguistics, and Discourse Analysis. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110197808Search in Google Scholar
Tauroza, Steve and Desmond Allison (1990). “Speech Rates in British English.” Applied Linguistics 11, 90–105.10.1093/applin/11.1.90Search in Google Scholar
Torres Cacoullos, Rena (2015). “Gradual Loss of Analyzability: Diachronic Priming Effects.” Aria Adli, Marco García García and Göz Kaufmann, eds. Variation in Language: System- and Usage-based Approaches. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 265–288.10.1515/9783110346855-011Search in Google Scholar
van de Pol, Nikki (2012). “Between Copy and Cognate: The Origin of Absolutes in Old and Middle English.” Lars Johanson and Martine Robbeets, eds. Copies vs Cognates in Bound Morphology. Leiden: Brill, 297–322.10.1163/9789004230477_014Search in Google Scholar
Weiner, E. Judith and William Labov (1983). “Constraints on the Agentless Passive.” Journal of Linguistics 19, 29–58.10.1017/S0022226700007441Search in Google Scholar
©2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston