Complementation of Adjectives - DiVA portal502227/FULLTEXT01.pdf · Complementation of Adjectives...

UPPSALA UNIVERSITY

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH MASTER’S THESIS

SPRING 2010

Complementation of

Adjectives A Corpus-Based Study of Adjectival

Complementation by that- and to-clauses

HENRIK KAATARI

SUPERVISOR:

CHRISTER GEISLER

Abstract This corpus-based study investigates adjectives that allow complementation by both that- and to-clauses. The study is concerned with arriving at a structural and functional description of the distribution of adjectives that allow complementation by both to-infinitive clauses and that-clauses, based on the various syntactic and semantic manifestations of these two clause types and the adjectives that are complemented by them. The study reveals that there is a strong correlation between the semantics of different adjectives, the grammatical patterns they allow and their differing valency possibilities. Furthermore, the study shows that to-clauses are primarily used when the subject of the complement clause does not need to be explicitly marked. Conversely, that-clauses are primarily used when the subject of the complement clause is required. Other factors influencing the choice between that- and to-clauses include the ability to mark modality and tense on the finite verb in that-clauses as well as differing register distribution. The ability to mark modality on the finite verb in that-clauses functions as a strong factor favouring the use of that-clauses. The differing register distribution reveals that post-predicative to-clauses typically are represented by complex matrix subjects in the academic register whereas the matrix subjects of post-predicative to-clauses in fiction and the spoken register typically are represented by anaphoric personal pronouns. Finally, the register distribution of adjectives complemented by that- and to-clauses has been linked to differing functions of these clauses in different registers. The study shows that extraposed to-clauses frequently complement epistemic matrix adjectives in the academic register. In the spoken register, on the other hand, post-predicative that-clauses with that omission typically complement evaluative predicates.

Terminology

Extraposed clause – Anticipatory it as matrix subject Post-predicative clause – Lexical noun phrase or referring pronoun as matrix subject Pre-predicative clause – That- or to-clause as matrix subject

Grammatical Patterns

Co-referential subjects – Matrix subject is co-referential with the implied subject of the to-clause Subject-to-subject raising – The entire to-clause constitutes the subject of the matrix clause. Parallelism between post-predicative to-clauses and extraposed that-clauses Object-to-subject raising – Implied object of the to-clause allows raising to become the matrix subject. Parallelism between extraposed and post-predicative to-clauses Optional to-clause – Adjectives that can remain uncomplemented and still be grammatical. Similar to adjectives that allow subject-to-subject raising and object-to-subject raising Extraposed clause only – Adjectives that only allow complementation by extraposed clauses Valency Patterns

Impersonal – Adjectives that only complementation by extraposed clauses Personal – Adjectives that only allow complementation by post-predicative clauses Impersonal/Personal – Adjectives that allow a change between extraposed and post-predicative clauses across that- and to-clauses Semantic Categories

Epistemic modality – Expressing the likelihood of the content in the complement clause being true. Two subtypes: (i) truth – e.g. likely, true, clear, (ii) perception - sure Deontic modality – Concerned the use of language to indicate one’s will on other agents. Two subtypes: (i) obligation – e.g. necessary, essential, (ii) volition – e.g. desirable, useful Dynamic modality – Expressing some property or disposition of a participant, typically the ability or power to carry out an action. Two subtypes: (i) potentiality – possible, impossible, (ii) human attribute – e.g. eager, proud, content

Evaluation – Expressing value judgements concerning the content in the complement clause. Three subtypes: (i) general evaluation – e.g. good, nice, great, (ii) appropriateness – e.g. appropriate, natural, (iii) emotive reaction – e.g. glad, afraid, sorry

Contents

1. Introduction.................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Grammatical Background ......................................................................................... 2 1.1.1 Adjectives Complemented by that-clauses ......................................................... 2 1.1.2 Adjectives Complemented by to-clauses............................................................. 4

1.2 Valency Patterns ........................................................................................................ 7 1.3 Semantic Background................................................................................................ 9 1.4 Previous Research.....................................................................................................11 1.5 Material and Method ................................................................................................13

2. Patterns ....................................................................................................... 17

2.1 Semantics and Modality ...........................................................................................20 2.1.1 Epistemic Modality ............................................................................................21 2.1.2 Deontic Modality ................................................................................................26 2.1.3 Dynamic Modality..............................................................................................28 2.1.4 Evaluation...........................................................................................................30

2.2 Register Variation.....................................................................................................35 2.3 Semantic Categories and Valency Patterns - Summary ..........................................36

3. Factors Influencing the Choice Between that- and to-clauses .................. 38

3.1 For-subjects and the Extraposed Parallelism ..........................................................38 3.2 More on the Extraposed Parallelism........................................................................41 3.3 The Post-Predicative Parallelism .............................................................................44 3.4 The Extraposed/Post-Predicative Parallelism..........................................................46

3.4.1 Subject-Raising ..................................................................................................47 3.4.2 Object-Raising....................................................................................................52

3.5 Register Variation and the Function of Extraposed and Post-Predicative Clauses

.........................................................................................................................................54

4. Concluding Remarks.................................................................................. 57

Bibliography ................................................................................................... 60

Complementation of Adjectives – Henrik Kaatari

1

1. Introduction

This study is concerned with the complementation of adjectives by to-infinitive clauses and

that-clauses, exemplified in (1) and (2). The parallelism between (1) and (2) raises the

question whether there is a semantic equivalence between these two types of complement

clauses.1

(1) John is likely to go

(2) It is likely that John will go

Drawing on Rivière (1981: 15) it will, however, be assumed here that “any syntactic

difference reflects a semantic difference (whatever the nature of the latter)” and these two

types of complement clauses will therefore be treated as (i) syntactically different, (ii)

semantically different and (iii) functionally different.

The aim of this study is to arrive at a structural and functional description of the

distribution of adjectives that allow complementation by both that- and to-infinitive clauses,

based on the various syntactic and semantic manifestations of these two clause types and the

adjectives that are complemented by them. More specifically, the study will try to answer

whether there is a correlation between the semantics of different adjectives, the grammatical

patterns they allow and their differing valency possibilities. Furthermore, the study will try to

answer which factors influence the choice between that- and to-infinitive clauses. A

secondary aim of this study is to determine whether the adjectives that are complemented by

that- and to-infinitive clauses are distributed differently across different registers and, if so,

what the factors behind this distribution are.

The study is divided in three parts. The first part, the present section, introduces the

theoretical framework that this study is based on, including grammatical and semantic aspects

of the two types of complement clauses as well as an introduction to the concept of valency.

The first part also introduces the methodology used in the present study. The second part,

section 2, explores the relationship between the semantics of different adjectives, the

grammatical patterns they allow and their differing valency possibilities. Finally, the third

part, section 3, discusses different aspects that influence the choice between that- and to-

clauses. More specifically, the third part identifies different parallelisms in which that- and to-

clauses constitute two different stylistic options and discusses these options from a functional

and usage-based perspective.

1 The parallelism between (1) and (2) is not applicable to all adjectives allowing complementation by both types of clauses. See Quirk et al. (1985: 1228) for more examples of adjectives in which this parallelism is inherent.


2

1.1 Grammatical Background

Adjectives allow both finite and non-finite complementation.2 Complementation by that-

clauses and to-infinitive clauses, henceforth to-clauses, although finite and non-finite

respectively, share a number of constructional properties. As shown in (3)-(8), both clause

types are superficially alike by occurring in post-predicative, extraposed and pre-predicative

constructions:3

(3) I am certain that she will play (Post-predicative) (4) It is important that she will play (Extraposed) (5) That she will play is important (Pre-predicative) (6) She is certain to play (Post-predicative) (7) It is impossible for her to play (Extraposed) (8) For her to play is impossible (Pre-predicative) The terms post-predicative and pre-predicative refer to the position of the complement clause

in relationship to the adjectival matrix predicate. For example, in (3) the complement clause is

placed after the predicate certain (post-predicative) whereas in (5) the complement clause is

placed before the predicate important (pre-predicative). Throughout this study, the terms

predicate and adjective will be used interchangeably. Unless explicitly stated otherwise, both

the terms adjective and predicate are exclusively used to refer to adjectival matrix predicates

complemented by either that- or to-clauses.

In the following two sections, that-clauses and to-clauses will be introduced separately.

1.1.1 Adjectives Complemented by that-clauses

Adjectives complemented by that-clauses can be divided into two different groups: (i)

adjectives with an experiencer as subject and (ii) adjectives with ‘anticipatory’ it as subject

(see Quirk et al. 1985: 1223-1225). The first group consists of adjectives that allow a lexical

noun phrase or a referring pronoun as subject, as in (9), whereas the second group consists of

adjectives occurring with it as a subject, as in (10).

(9) I am surprised that he was late/*I am surprising that he was late (Post-predicative) (10) It is surprising that he was late/*It is surprised that he was late (Extraposed) (11) That he was late is surprising/*That he was late is surprised (Pre-predicative)

2 Adjectives also allow complementation by other types of finite and non-finite clauses. Other than that- and to-clauses, adjectives can also be complmented by finite wh-clauses (see Quirk et al. 1985: 1225) and non-finite -ing participial clauses (see Quirk et al. 1985: 1230). 3 Throughout in the examples given in this paper, the adjectival matrix predicates are italicized and the complement clauses are given in bold.


3

In (9), the subject of the matrix clause is a personal pronoun and the adjective is

complemented by a post-predicative that-clause. In (10), the grammatical subject of the

matrix clause is the ‘anticipatory it’ (Quirk et al. 1985: 89) and the adjective is complemented

by an extraposed that-clause. Anticipatory it in (10) is analysed as the grammatical subject

since the logical subject of the clause is the extraposed that-clause. The fact that it only

functions as the grammatical subject in (10) becomes clear when compared to the pre-

predicative that-clause as subject in (11). Thus (10) and (11) can be said to be analogous as

the that-clause functions as the logical subject in both constructions. As a result, the pre-

predicative construction in (11) is seen as a subtype of the extraposed construction in (10)

with anticipatory it as subject (see Biber et al. 1999: 676).

As seen by the non-interchangeable relationship between surprised and surprising in (9)-

(11), the majority of adjectives complemented by that-clauses only allow complementation by

either a post-predicative or an extraposed clause but there is a small group of adjectives that

allow both a lexical noun phrase or a referring pronoun as subject and anticipatory it as

subject, as seen in (12).

(12) I am sad that he was late (Post-predicative)

It is sad that he was late (Extraposed) That he was late is sad (Pre-predicative)

The adjective sad compared to surprised and surprising in (9)-(11) also shows an important

distinction between non-participial and participial adjectives. Non-participial adjectives, such

as sad, are differentiated from participial adjectives, such as surprised and surprising, by the

fact that participial adjectives have a verbal transform (Householder et al. 1964: 5). As a

consequence, it is surprising that he was late has the verbal transform it surprises me that he

was late (see also Quirk et al. 1985: 1223-1224). The non-participial status of sad does not

extend to the potentiality of all non-participial adjectives allowing complementation by both

post-predicative and extraposed that-clauses. There are, however, no participial adjectives

allowing this constructional diversity. Except for sad, Quirk et al. (1985: 1223-1224) and

Biber et al. (1999: 671) mention certain and Huddleston & Pullum (2002: 964) sure and clear

as instances of adjectives that can control both post-predicative and extraposed that-clauses

(see section 2.1.1 for a discussion of the complementation of sure). The distinction between

non-participial and participial adjectives thus means that non-participial adjectives can control

either a post-predicative or an extraposed that-clause (except for sad, certain, sure and clear

which can control both). Furthermore, past participial adjectives (e.g. surprised) control post-


4

predicative that-clauses only, and gerundial participial adjectives (e.g. surprising) control

extraposed that-clauses only.

The adjectives controlling that-clauses can be divided into different semantic groups based

upon whether they allow complementation by post-predicative or extraposed clauses. Biber et

al. (1999: 672-673) group adjectives controlling post-predicative clauses into ‘certainty’ and

‘affective adjectives’ whereas adjectives controlling extraposed clauses are represented by

‘certainty’, ‘affective’ and ‘importance adjectives.’ The semantic groupings used by Biber et

al. (1999) are not adopted in the present study. Instead, four different semantic categories are

introduced in section 1.3.

Quirk et al. (1985: 1222-1225) also group adjectives that control that-clauses into semantic

groups but their main emphasis by doing so is to highlight the fact that different semantic

groupings allow different mood in the that-clause. As a consequence, a that-clause can have

an indicative or subjunctive verb as well as putative should. The verb phrase structure of that-

clauses will not be explored further in this study, but see Behre (1955) and Mindt (2008b) for

more information.

1.1.2 Adjectives Complemented by to-clauses

Although to-clauses superficially occur in the same constructions as that-clauses, there are

differences in the types of grammatical patterns that are associated with to-clauses. Biber et

al. (1999: 716-717) distinguish four different grammatical patterns into which adjectives

complemented by to-clauses clauses can be grouped.

The first pattern represents instances in which the subject of the matrix clause is co-

referential with the subject of the to-clause, as in (13). The fact that the subject of the matrix

clause is co-referential with the subject in the to-clause becomes clear when the first pattern is

contrasted with the second pattern in which the entire to-clause constitutes the subject of the

matrix clause, as seen by comparing (13) and (14) to (15) and (16).

(13) Carol was determined to buy a car Co-referential subjects (14) *For Carol to buy a car was determined

(15) The industry is unlikely to meet the demand Subject-to-subject raising (16) For the industry to meet the demand is unlikely

(17) It is unlikely that the industry will meet the demand

(18) That the industry will meet the demand is unlikely


5

The second pattern, illustrated in (15), is called subject-to-subject raising since the subject of

the matrix clause is considered to be the logical subject of the to-clause. Thus (15) is an

example of subject-to-subject raising since the matrix subject, the industry, is the logical

subject of the to-clause, to meet the demand. This fact is further exemplified by the pre-

predicative construction in (16), which shows that the to-clause together with the matrix

subject in (15) constitute the subject of the matrix clause (for the industry to meet the

demand). Furthermore, the subject-to-subject raising pattern also shows resemblance to that-

clauses. As seen by comparing the post-predicative to-clause in (15) with the extraposed that-

clause in (17), the matrix subject in (15), the industry, functions as the subject of the that-

clause in (17).

The third pattern identified by Biber et al. (1999: 717) is called object-to-subject raising,

termed ‘hollow infinitival’ by Huddleston & Pullum (2002: 1257) and also known as tough-

movement (see Mair 1990: 57 ff), in which the implied object of the the to-clause can ‘raise’

and become the subject of the matrix clause. As seen in the pre-predicative construction in

(19) and in the extraposed construction in (20), the pronoun him is the object in the to-clause

but 'raises' to become the subject of the matrix clause in the post-predicative construction in

(21).

(19) To reach him is impossible

(20) It is impossible to reach him

(21) He is impossible to reach[__] Object-to-subject raising Finally, the fourth pattern resembles both subject-to-subject raising and object-to-subject

raising but differs by the fact that adjectives in this pattern can remain uncomplemented and

still be grammatical.

(22) You're lucky to be alive Optional to-clause (23) That would be very bad to do[__] Optional to-clause (24) For you to be alive is lucky

(25) For us/someone to do that would be very bad

(26) You are lucky

(27) That would be bad

(28) *The industry is unlikely

(29) *He is impossible

Accordingly, (22) is similar to the subject-to-subject raising in (15), as seen by the the fact

that the implied subject of the to-clause corresponds to the grammatical subject of the matrix


6

clause, as seen in (24) (examples (22)-(27) adopted from Biber et al. (1999: 717)). Similarly,

(23) exhibits object-to-subject raising, as seen by the fact that that functions as object in the

to-clause in (25). The crucial point, however, which sets these adjectives apart from those

exhibiting subject-to-subject and object-to-subject raising, is the ability of examples such as

(22) and (23) to remain uncomplemented and still be grammatical, as seen in (26) and (27).

Note also the ungrammaticality of the uncomplemented versions of the subject-to-subject

raising construction in (15) and the object-to-subject raising construction in (21), given in (28)

and (29).

As seen above, examples of the four different patterns of adjectives complemented by to-

clauses have all been post-predicative examples (such as co-referential subjects in (13),

subject-to-subject raising in (15), object-to-subject raising in (21) and optional to-clauses in

(22) and (23)). These post-predicative examples have been contrasted and compared to

extraposed and pre-predicative examples because in their extraposed and pre-predicative

transforms they do not exhibit the properties that are associated with the pattern in question.

For example, consider (19)- (21), repeated below as (30)-(32). The pre-predicative clause in

(30) and the extraposed clause in (31) do not constitute examples of object-to-subject raising,

only the post-predicative transform in (32) does, since the object of the to-clause in (30) and

(31) becomes the subject of the matrix clause in (32).

(30) To reach him is impossible

(31) It is impossible to reach him

(32) He is impossible to reach[__] Object-to-subject raising (33) To do that is possible

(34) It is possible to do that

(35) *He is possible to do that Extraposed only It is thus possible to add a fifth pattern to the paradigm in which adjectives that are

exclusively complemented by extraposed and pre-predicative clauses only are included, as

illustrated by the acceptability of possible complemented by a pre-predicative clause in (33)

and an extraposed clause in (34) and by the unacceptability of the post-predicative

construction in (35).

There are strong semantic associations between the adjectives that are used with each

pattern. Thus, the first pattern with co-referential subjects, as in (13), is typically used with

adjectives expressing ‘ability or willingness’ (e.g. determined, willing, able) and adjectives

expressing ‘personal affective stance’ (e.g. afraid, angry, glad). On the other hand, the pattern

with subject-to-subject raising, as in (15), occurs with adjectives expressing ‘degree of


7

certainty’ (e.g. unlikely,certain, sure) whereas the object-to-subject pattern, as in (21) is

associated with ‘ease or difficulty’ adjectives (e.g. impossible, easy, hard) (Biber et al. 1999:

718 ff). The different semantic domains and their associations with different complementation

patterns will be further introduced in section 1.3.

As seen so far, to-clauses are constructionally more flexible than that-clauses as there is a

large number of adjectives that allow complementation by both post-predicative and

extraposed to-clauses.4 The non-finite nature of to-clauses also sets them apart from that-

clauses since they do not have an obligatory subject. Some of the examples given so far have,

however, showed that subjects can be introduced in to-clauses by a complex subject noun

phrase which, according to the terminology used by Mair (1990:40), consists of the 'subject-

introducing particle for' and the 'subject proper,' also known as for-subjects (e.g. for you in

(13)). As noted by Mair (1990: 41), this subject clearly fails to meet the morphological

requirements of subjecthood since the pronoun is in the objective case and not the subjective

(cf. for me, for her etc.). Furthermore, since a to-clause by definition is an infinitive, there is

no agreement between the subject and the verb. There are, however, arguments in support for

considering a for + NP phrase as a subject, one of which has already been shown in (16),

repeated below as (37), which shows that the for + NP phrase in (36) forms a constituent

together with the to-clause as it can be moved to pre-predicative position in (37) with for the

industry as subject of the to-clause. Another argument for considering the for + NP phrase in

(36) a subject is the fact that the entire for + NP + to-clause can be passivised, as shown in

(38) (for more arguments in favour of treating the for + NP phrase as subject see Mair 1990:

41-45).

(36) It is unlikely for the industry to meet the demand

(37) For the industry to meet the demand is unlikely

(38) It is unlikely for the demand to be met by the industry

1.2 Valency Patterns

Valency is an important concept when dealing with complementation. Originally, the concept

of valency was exclusively used to refer to verbs (see Allerton 1982) but was later applied to

nouns (see Herbst 1988) and adjectives (see Herbst 1983 and Herbst et al. 2004). Regarding

the complementation of adjectives by that- and to-clauses, the valency of a particular

adjective is dependent on two factors. First, different adjectives allow complementation by

4 Since pre-predicative clauses are a subtype, or, as some would argue, a supertype, of the extraposed construction they are here taken as showing the same constructional properties as extraposed clauses.


8

different types of complement clauses. This is not an issue for the present study as the

adjectives that are included here all have the valency possibility of complementation by both

that- and to-clauses. Secondly, and more importantly, valency is concerned with the type of

construction different adjectives allow. For example, in section 1.1, it was noted that the

adjective possible was restricted to complementation by extraposed clauses only whereas the

adjective impossible allowed complementation by both extraposed and post-predicative

clauses. In other words, possible and impossible have different valency possibilities. In order

to account for the difference in valency possibilities between different sets of adjectives, a

three-way distinction has been made which serves to classify the adjectives included in this

study into groups, based upon which type(s) of complementation(s) they allow. The first

pattern, named the impersonal pattern, includes adjectives which only have the valency

possibility of being complemented by extraposed that- and to-clauses, i.e. with anticipatory it

as subject of the matrix clause, such as possible in (39) and (40).

(39) It is possible to arrange retirements on spurious medical" grounds, but this

practice was heavily criticised by the Commons Home Affairs select committee earlier this year. (BNC A7Y 535)

(40) A Minority Government will hardly be able to deal with the situation, and it is

quite possible that Your Majesty might be asked to approve of a National

Government. (BNC A6G 132) In contrast, the second pattern, named the personal pattern, includes adjectives which only

allow complementation by post-predicative that- and to-clauses, i.e. with a lexical noun

phrase or a referring pronoun as subject of the matrix clause, such as glad in (41) and (42).

(41) She was glad to see the back of them with their interfering ways and their

lack of respect. (BNC A73 1037) (42) Everyone needs to earn a living, and when I went to New York, I was glad that

I could earn mine by my playing. (BNC AJV 356) The third pattern, on the other hand, consists of adjectives that allow different types of

subjects in the matrix clause depending on which type of clause they are complemented by.

As a consequence, the third pattern, named the impersonal/personal pattern, includes

adjectives which allow both a referring pronoun or a lexical noun phrase and anticipatory it as

matrix subject with both that- and to-clauses (e.g. right as in she is right to...,it is right to...,

she is right that...,it is right that). In other words, the impersonal/personal pattern includes all

adjectives that allow a change between the post-predicative and the extraposed construction


9

across the two clause types, such as likely in (43) and (44) (one cabinet minister is likely to...

(post-predicative) and it is likely that... (extraposed)).

(43) One Cabinet minister, however, is likely to have saved some money on his

hotel bill to go towards his bid for next year. (BNC A59 138)

(44) Over the next few months it is likely that the Home Office will order out

hundreds more of the 3,500 Kurds who arrived in May and June and now

live in north London. (BNC A59 710) The full classification of the adjectives included in this study across valency patterns is

presented in section 2.

1.3 Semantic Background

It has been widely recognised that there is strong relationship between the semantics of

different predicates and the type of clause they are complemented by (see e.g. Herriman 2000

and Dixon 2005: 86-87). Furthermore, adjectives complemented by to- and that-clauses are

also treated as modal adjectives, i.e. adjectives denoting modality (see Perkins 1983: 66 ff and

Mair 1990: 48-49). In this sense, modality is seen as “referring to the totality of linguistic

means used to express speakers’ attitudes towards the truth of propositions or the likelihood

or desirability of events” (Mair 1990: 84). The modality of an adjective complemented by a

that- or to-clause is thus treated here as determined by the semantics of the adjectival matrix

predicate (see Palmer 1979: 1-2 and Lyons 1977: 788).5

The semantic classification of the adjectives included in this study is based on four

different semantic categories which serve to account for the different modalities that the

adjectives included in this study denote. The categories and their different subtypes are given

in Table 1.

Table 1. Semantic categories and their different subtypes.

Epistemic Deontic Dynamic Evaluation Truth Obligation Potentiality General Evaluation

Perception Volition Human Attribute Appropriateness Emotive Reaction

The semantic categories in Table 1 are adopted from Herriman (2000) and the classification

of the adjectives in the present study is based on Herriman’s (2000) classification although

Hermerén’s (1986) discussion of deontic adjectives and the discussion of modal adjectives in

5 It should be noted that modality also can be expressed by modal and lexical verbs as well as by nouns and adverbs (see Perkins 1983 and Hermerén 1986: 57).


10

Perkins (1983) have also been used.6 Herriman (2000) investigates the interaction between the

semantic manifestation of different matrix predicates (primarily adjectival although verbal

and nominal predicates are also included) and four different extraposed clauses (including

that- and to-clauses). However, since Herriman only includes extraposed clauses in her study,

those adjectives that are only complemented by post-predicative clauses have been classified

separately by the present author since they are not included in the original classification by

Herriman. Aspects related to different classificational difficulties are discussed in section 2.1.

Epistemic, deontic and dynamic modality are all recognised as essential components of

modal logic (see Perkins 1983: 9 and Palmer 1979: 2-3). The fourth category, evaluation, is

referred to by Herriman (2000: 585) as a ‘rag bag’ of semantic categories (see also Perkins

(1983: 12) for a discussion of the modality of evaluation). To begin with, epistemic modality

“is concerned with the interpretation of the world via the laws of human reason” (Perkins

1983: 10) and is taken by Herriman (2000: 585) as concerned with the likelihood of the

content expressed in the complement clause being true (see also Lyons 1977: 793). Epistemic

modality, also known as extrinsic modality (Quirk et al. 1985: 219), is divided into two

different subtypes: (i) truth, which expresses opinions about the truth of the proposition in the

complement clause, represented by adjectival matrix predicates such as likely, true and clear

and (ii) perception, where a perceiver comments on the proposition expressed in the

complement clause, represented by sure which requires a lexical noun phrase or a referring

pronoun as subject, i.e. a perceiver.

Deontic modality, also known as intrinsic modality (Quirk et al. 1985: 219) and root

modality (Hermerén 1986: 79), is concerned with “the use of language to indicate one’s will

on other agents” (Herriman 2000: 585, see also Perkins 1983: 11). The adjectival matrix

predicates in this category can be divided into those expressing obligation, i.e. the degree of

obligatoriness of the content expressed in the complement clause, represented by adjectives

such as necessary and essential, and those expressing volition, i.e. the intention, desire or will

of a participant regarding the content of the complement clause, represented by adjectives

such as desirable and useful.

Dynamic modality is differentiated from both epistemic and deontic modality by

expressing some property or disposition of a participant, typically the ability or power to carry

out an action (Herriman 2000: 585). Two different subtypes of dynamic modality are

6 For other semantic classifications (with direct or indirect reference to the concept of modality) of adjectives complemented by that- and/or to-clauses see Biber et al. (1999: 672 ff), Dixon (2005: 86-87), Mair (1990: 26), Kiparsky & Kiparsky (1970), Mindt (2008b) and Quirk et al. (1985: 1222 ff).


11

distinguished: (i) potentiality, i.e. an opinion regarding the potential success of the content in

the complement clause, represented by adjectival matrix predicates such as possible and

impossible, and (ii) human attribute, i.e. expressing opinions about properties that are only

applicable to human participants, represented by adjectives such as eager, proud and content

(see Herriman 2000: 586 for a discussion about the arbitrariness of the subtype of human

attribute).

Finally, evaluation expresses value judgements concerning the content of the complement

clause (for in depth discussions about evaluation see Martin & White 2005 and Hunston &

Sinclair 2000). Due to its status as a ‘rag bag’ of semantic categories, Herriman (2000: 586)

distinguishes six different subtypes of evaluation but only three of these are relevant to the

present study. The first subtype, general evaluation, expresses general opinions about the

favourability/unfavourability of the content in the complement clause and is represented by

adjectives such as good, nice and great. The second subtype, appropriateness, is concerned

with the correctness or suitability of the content in complement clause and is represented by

adjectives such as appropriate and natural. The final subtype, emotive reaction, is concerned

with emotive reactions regarding the content in the complement clause and is typically

represented by adjectives such as glad, afraid and sorry.

For the full classification of the adjectives included in the study, see section 2.

1.4 Previous Research

Complementation, due to its status as an integral component of transformational grammar, has

been commented on extensively by researchers from different linguistic backgrounds.

Descriptions covering the whole spectrum of complementation have more or less been

limited to verbal predicates only. When adjectival predicates have been discussed they have

traditionally been treated together with their verbal counterparts or simply marginalised. Thus

typological (e.g. Givón 1980, Noonan 1985), transformational (Rosenbaum 1967) and general

studies of complementation (e.g. Huddleston 1971, Greenbaum et al. 1996, Hudson 1971)

typically, although they primarily focus on verbal predicates, include examples of adjectival

predicates without distinguishing them from verbal and nominal predicates.

Studies of complementation by that-clauses are of various kinds, although the main

emphasis has been placed on discussing retention and omission of that. These studies have

mainly been functional in their nature, ranging from diachronic (e.g. Finegan & Biber 1995

and Rissanen 1991) to synchronic studies (e.g. Thompson & Mulac 1991, Elsness 1984,

Bolinger 1972, Kaltenböck 2006, Kearns 2007), but again with a clear focus on verbal rather


12

than adjectival predicates. There are, however, a few studies that exclusively discuss

complementation of adjectival predicates by that-clauses. These studies include the listing of

all adjectives that can be complemented by that-clauses (Householder et al. 1964), the

discoursal difference between extraposed and post-predicative clauses (Mindt 2008a) and the

distribution and function of a limited number of deontic and evaluative adjectives by van

Linden & Davidse (2009). Other studies explore the interaction between different adjectival

predicates and the verb phrase in the that-clause (Behre 1955 and Mindt 2008b).

Few scholars have investigated the relationship between the predicate and the type of

complement clause it takes. Rohdenburg (2005), however, gives a diachronic account of the

factors included in replacing finite complement clauses (that-clauses) by infinitive clauses

with verbal predicates. Biber (1999), on the other hand, although only dealing with verbal and

nominal predicates, explores the discourse functions of that-clauses and to-infinitives by

considering their varying lexico-grammatical associations. By doing so, Biber (1999)

identifies significant differences in the lexico-grammatical associations of the two types of

constructions which are linked to the different register distribution of the two constructions

and consequently to their varying discourse functions. In a similar approach, Herriman (2000)

explores the interaction between clause type and meaning of different predicates by

investigating which type of clause predicates in extraposition (i.e. extraposed clauses) are

complemented by, based on a semantic categorisation of a large number of different

predicates. Although the predicates in Herriman’s study include verbs, nouns and adjectives,

the semantic classification of the predicates and the distribution of different semantic types

across clause type show that that-clauses typically co-occur with predicates expressing

‘epistemic modality’ i.e. expresses “the speaker’s opinion about the truth value of the

extraposed clause” (Herriman 2001: 587). Infinitival clauses, on the other hand, most

frequently co-occur with predicates belonging to the semantic category of ‘dynamic modality’

i.e. referring to the potential success of the activity represented by the extraposed infinitival

clause.

Mair (1990) in his study of infinitival complement clauses focuses exclusively on

extraposed clauses, although, unlike Herriman, he includes pre-predicative clauses in his

study. Mair (1990: 25), however, notes that adjectival predicates expressing ‘truth’ or

‘likelihood’ are much better suited to occur with that-clauses with the obligatory marking of

tense and aspect rather than infinitive clauses. Similarly, Dixon (2005: 86-87) comments on

the semantic class of adjectival predicates and the type of complement clause they typically

occur with, concluding that ‘difficulty’ adjectives are predominantly complemented by


13

infinitival clauses, whereas adjectives expressing ‘qualification’ or ‘value’ are normally

complemented by that-clauses.

Finally, Rivière (1981) is a rare example of a study that discusses the full set of valency

possibilities of adjectives complemented by that- and to-clauses by including both extraposed

and post-predicative clauses in his study. Since Rivière’s main focus is transformational, he

disregards the semantic classification of the adjectival predicates and instead tries to arrive at

a cross-classification based upon both the supertype (i.e. that- or to-clause) and the subtype of

clause (i.e. extraposed or post-predicative) different adjectival predicates can be

complemented by.

The present study attempts to fill the gap of studies dealing with semantic and syntactic

aspects of adjectives complemented by both extraposed and post-predicative that- and to-

clauses. By also including a classification of the different valency possibilites of different

adjectives, the present study also incorporates a concept that has been more or less neglected

in corpus-based studies of adjectival complementation.

1.5 Material and Method

The data used in this study is derived from the British National Corpus (henceforth BNC) (see

Burnard & Aston 1998 for more information about the BNC). Due to the size of the BNC

(100 million words), a subcorpus consisting of one million words was created through the

BNCweb interface (see Hoffman et al. 2002). The subcorpus was created by a stratified

sampling procedure (see Biber 1993: 243 and Meyer & Nelson 2006: 107), in which four

different registers were selected and each register was then ‘filled’ by a random selection of

text-files up to the maximum of 250,000 running words. The idea is to keep the subcorpus

closely balanced between the four registers in order to facilitate comparisons across registers

where applicable (Hunston 2008: 156). Furthermore, by including data from four different

registers, the aim is to make the subcorpus representative of general British English (Biber et

al. 1999: 25, see also Biber 1993 for more on representativeness in corpus design). The

registers included in the subcorpus and the number of different text-files in each register are

given in Table 2.

Table 2. Composition of the subcorpus. Register No. of Text-files Words Academic 18 250,000 Fiction 17 250,000 Press 20 250,000 Spoken 30 250,000 Total 85 1,000,000


14

The four registers included in the subcorpus are considered ‘core registers’ by Biber et al.

(1999: 24) as they “cover much of the range of variation in English, while being restricted to a

manageable number of distinctions” and also follows the register distribution used in BNC

Baby, a subcorpus of four million words (see Burnard 2003). It is debatable, however,

whether a corpus of one million words can be representative of a given variety. Meyer &

Nelson (2006: 107) suggest that corpora of a size similar to the present subcorpus are

‘reflective’ rather than representative of a given variety or, as described by Hunston (2008:

160), a “microcosm of a larger phenomenon.” However, as pointed out by Mair (1990: 15), a

representative corpus, in the statistical sense, is only required for exclusively quantitative and

statistically oriented studies. Qualitative analysis, including the study of syntax in discourse,

“remains possible and valuable even if the corpus is not representative in the statistical sense”

(Mair 1990: 15).

As shown in Table 2, the number of text-files included in the subcorpus is relatively low,

especially when compared with the corpora included in the Brown family which consist of

500 text-samples each comprising 2000 words.7 The difference between BNC and the Brown

family corpora is that a text-file in BNC does not necessarily consist of one single text,

instead a text-file or ‘document’ can be made up of several different texts with a normal size

of 40 000-50 000 words per text-file (Aston & Burnard 1998: 39). In contrast, text-samples in

corpora such as those included in the Brown family each consists of a sample from one text

only.

The data included in this study has been collected in two different steps. First, a pilot study

was conducted which utilized the Brown family corpora with the purpose of establishing

which adjectives most frequently are complemented by that- and to-clauses respectively. The

reason why a pilot study was conducted, using a separate dataset, is that the BNCweb

interface will not readily allow a simple extraction of all adjectives followed by that- and to-

clauses as it is only possible to search the BNC for a word with a specific POS-tag, not a

specific POS-tag without specifying the word. Instead, by using Wordsmith Tools (see Scott

2004) to search the Brown family corpora, it was possible to search for any adjective followed

by that functioning as a subordinating conjunction (i.e. the search string “J* that_CS”) and

any adjective followed by to as an infinitive marker (i.e. the search string “J* to_TO”) (see

Garside 1987 for more on the CLAWS tagset that was used for this particular extraction). One

7 The Brown family corpora includes the Brown corpus (see Kucěra & Francis 1967), the Freiburg-Brown corpus (Frown, see Hundt et al. 1999), the Lancaster-Oslo/Bergen corpus (LOB, see Johansson et al. 1978) and the Freiburg-LOB corpus (FLOB, see Hundt et al. 1998).


15

obvious limitation of this procedure is that it does not account for instances of that omission

(e.g. I’m glad [Ø] you’re home) and instances of for-subjects (e.g. it’s possible for him to

attend). It has been assumed, however, that instances of that omission are not exclusively

lexically dependent and due to their low frequency, at least compared to instances of that

retention, should not alter the the results in any significant way (cf. Biber 1999 and

Kaltenböck 2006, see also Bolinger 1962 for more on factors favouring that omission). As

regards instances of for-subjects, additional searches (i.e. the search string. “J* for_IF”) have

been conducted which revealed that the most frequent adjectives complemented by a for-

subject followed by an infinitive were all accounted for in the initial search (i.e. the search

string “J* to_TO”).

The list of adjectives derived from the pilot study was then used to classify the different

valency possibilities of each adjective, i.e. what type(s) of clause(s) they can be

complemented by. Finally, a list was created, which included those adjectives which can be

complemented by both that- and to-clauses based upon the valency patterns given in A

Valency Dictionary of English (Herbst et al. 2004) and additional use of the BNC and COCA

as reference corpora.8 In other words, irrespective of whether a particular adjective was found

attested as complemented by both a that- and a to-clause, the adjectives included in the list are

those that have the possibility of being complemented by both types of clauses.

The second step of the data collection was the extraction of those adjectives with the

potential of allowing dual complementation from the list that was created in the pilot study.

All the adjectives were sorted based on frequency and then extracted from the BNC by lemma

searches for each adjective. Instances of complementation by that- and to-clauses were

manually extracted for each adjective in order to account for instances of that omission and

presence of for-subjects.

Due to the vast number of adjectives allowing dual complementation (the pilot study

included more than 100 different adjectives) the study had to be limited in some way, as it

was not possible to include all instances of that- and to-clauses with all these adjectives. A

cut-off point was therefore established. The cut-off point has been set at the top 40 adjectives

that can be complemented by both that- and to-clauses. The reason for this is twofold: (i) the

top 40 adjectives constitute almost one thousand examples and a bigger dataset would be

impracticable to handle for the present qualitative study and (ii) the inclusion of each new

adjective after the top 40 on the list yields very few new examples to the dataset which have

8 COCA is short for Corpus of Contemporary American English , see Davies (2009).


16

been more or less saturated (see McEnery et al. 2006: 16 for the concept of saturation in

corpus design). In other words, the cut-off point has been set at the top 40 adjectives since

there is strong support to indicate that there is very little variation in terms of high frequency

adjectives beyond this point. This distribution of the data is further supported by comparing

those adjective included in this study to adjectives cited in other studies as frequently

complemented by that- and to-clauses (see Mair 1990: 30, Herriman 2000: 597-599, Biber et

al. 1999: 672-673; 718-720, Quirk et al. 1985: 1223-1224; 1226-1230 and Dixon 2005: 86-

87). Accordingly, the data used in this study only includes a sample of the most frequent

adjectives that can be complemented by that- and to-clauses. Furthermore, these adjectives

can be said to be more or less representative of the grammatical category of adjectives that

can be complemented by that- and to-clauses. In other words, in analogy with sampling in

corpus design, the study includes a sample which is “a scaled-down version of a larger

population” which “will reproduce the characteristics of the population, especially those of

immediate interest, as closely as possible” (McEnery et al. 2006: 19).


17

2. Patterns

As noted by Hunston & Sinclair (2000: 83), words which occur in the same grammatical

pattern typically also share a meaning. In the following subsections, the relationship between

the semantics of different adjectives, the different clause types they are complemented by and

their valency possibilities will be explored in a number of different ways. According to the

terminology that has been introduced in sections 1.1.1-1.1.3, the following presentation of the

data will be dependent upon five different categories, as summarised in Table 3.

Table 3. Relevant terminology and the different linguistic categories included in the study.

Clause Type Construction Grammatical Pattern

Valency Pattern

Semantic Category

that Extraposed Co-referential subjects Impersonal Epistemic to Post-predicative Subject raising Personal Deontic Object raising Impersonal/Personal Dynamic Optional to-clause Evaluation Extraposed only

The categories of clause type and construction have already been dealt with extensively in

section 1 and need no further explanation except for the clarification that pre-predicative

clauses, as in (45), are here treated as a subtype of extraposed clauses and they are therefore

treated as belonging to the same construction (compare the pre-predicative construction in

(45) to the corresponding extraposed construction within parenthesis).

(45) That Smart should have been stigmatised as a madman in all his

publications after his confinement is not surprising, if any of this fragmentary, unpublished work in progress was known to his contemporaries. (BNC CFX 1138) (cf. It is not surprising that Smart should have been stigmatised as a

madman in all his publications after his confinement) Furthermore, pre-predicative clauses are extremely rare in the subcorpus, as only four

examples of pre-predicative constructions have been found (two that-clauses and two to-

clauses).

The category of grammatical pattern might also need further clarification. As was noted in

section. 1.1.2, the grammatical patterns in Table 3 are only related to adjectives

complemented by to-clauses. In other words, none of these grammatical patterns are

applicable to adjectives complemented by that-clauses. However, as will be shown in the

following subsections, the grammatical patterns, listed in Table 3, are important to the

understanding of the functions of different adjectives.

The main distribution of the adjectives included in this study is given in Table 4.


18

Table 4. The distribution of adjectives and their valency possibilities. Clause Construction

Adjective to to Total that that Total Total

Extrap. Post-pr. Extrap. Post-pr.

afraid (-) 5 5 (-) 23 23 28

anxious (-) 16 16 (-) 1 1 17

appropriate 10 (+) 10 2 (-) 2 12

apt (-) 2 2 (+) (-) 0 2

careful (-) 10 10 (-) (+) 0 10

certaina (+) 8 8 2 12 14 22

clear (-) (+) 0 58 1 59 59

concerned (-) 4 4 (-) 5 5 9

content (-) 3 3 (-) (+) 0 3

delighted (-) 4 4 (-) (+) 0 4

desirable 2 (-) 2 3 (-) 3 5

determined (-) 2 2 (+) (+) 0 2

eager (-) 4 4 (-) (+) 0 4

essential 5 1 6 3 (-) 3 9

fair 1 (-) 1 1 (-) 1 2

glad (-) 6 6 (-) 20 20 26

goodb 42 2 44 5 (-) 5 49

great 4 (+) 4 1 (-) 1 5

happy (-) 22 22 (-) 1 1 23

important 25 1 26 10 (-) 10 36

impossible 25 10 35 1 (-) 1 36

interesting 9 (-) 9 2 (-) 2 11

keen (-) 8 8 (-) (+) 0 8

likely 13 123 136 27 (-) 27 163

lucky (-) 5 5 (+) 4 4 9

natural 3 (-) 3 2 (-) 2 5

necessary 28 11 39 2 (-) 2 41

nice 13 (+) 13 4 (-) 4 17

pleased (-) 7 7 (-) 3 3 10

possible 56 (-) 56 16 (-) 16 72

proud (-) 1 1 (-) 2 2 3

right 3 2 5 4 3 7 12

sorry (-) 8 8 (-) 10 10 18

sure (-) 1 1 (-) 105 105 106

surprised (-) 9 9 (-) 5 5 14

surprising 2 (-) 2 12 (-) 12 14

true 2 (-) 2 21 (-) 21 23

unlikely 10 15 25 15 (-) 15 40

useful 9 (+) 9 (+) (-) 0 9

wise 2 3 5 (+) (-) 0 5

Total 264 293 557 191 195 386 943 a Typically there rather than it as subject with extraposed to-clauses, as in there is certain to be a snowstorm

tomorrow, see Herbst et al. (2004: 120). In this case, there is treated as functioning in the same way as non-referring, or anticipatory it. See also Bresnan (2001: 284) for a discussion of there functioning as ‘athematic subject.’ b

Also includes instances of better and best.


19

Table 4 shows the distribution of adjectives across clause type and construction as well as the

valency possibility of each adjective. As an initial survey of the data, it may be worth noting

that there is much variation in the frequency of individual adjectives. Furthermore, it is quite

clear that the actual distribution of these adjectives with the two clause types differs from the

potential distribution (as indicated by (+) and (-) in Table 4).

As discussed in section 1.2, and as seen in Table 4, different adjectives have different

valency possibilities. The adjectives included in this study have all been classified into three

different valency patterns, introduced in section 1.2 and repeated in Table 3. This

classification is based purely on the valency possibility of each adjective, as indicated by (+)

and (-) in Table 4. In other words, the classification is based on the valency possibility of each

adjective, not on the actual distribution of each adjective in the subcorpus. The classification

of the adjectives included in the study across valency pattern is given in Table 5.

Table 5. The classification of adjectives across valency pattern. Impersonal Personal Impersonal/Personal

desirable afraid appropriate fair anxious apt

interesting careful certain natural concerned clear

possible content determined surprising delighted essential

true eager good glad great happy important keen impossible pleased likely proud lucky sorry necessary surprised nice sure right unlikely useful wise

The adjectives that form the impersonal pattern are adjectives that only have the possibility of

occurring with extraposed that- and to-clauses, i.e. only with ‘anticipatory’ it as subject of the

matrix clause. The personal pattern, on the other hand, includes adjectives that only allow

post-predicative that- and to-clauses, i.e. only with a lexical noun phrase or referring pronoun

as subject of the matrix clause. Finally, the impersonal/personal pattern, includes adjectives

that allow different types of subjects of the matrix clause depending on which type of clause

they are complemented by, such as likely which can be complemented by both an extraposed

that-clause (It is likely that she will come) and a post-predicative to-clause (She is likely to

come). The three different valency patterns will be further discussed in subsequent sections.


20

2.1 Semantics and Modality

In this section, the distribution of the semantic categories introduced in section 1.3 will be

presented. Before examining the distribution, some classificational concerns must be

addressed. First, as mentioned in section 1.3, the classification is based on the one provided in

Herriman (2000).9 However, the adjectives that only allow a lexical noun phrase or a referring

pronoun as subject (i.e. members of the personal valency pattern) have been classified by the

present author. This classification is not entirely straightforward. The hardest distinction to

draw is the one between dynamic predicates expressing human attribute and evaluative

predicates expressing emotive reaction. As seen in Table 6, adjectives such as eager, proud

and careful have been classified as dynamic, expressing human attribute and not as

evaluative, expressing emotive reaction. The reason behind this classification is that these

adjectives are analysed as expressing a property or a disposition that is characteristic of a

participant and therefore more permanent or inherent rather than an emotive evaluation of a

less permanent nature (cf. Herriman 2000: 586).

Table 6. Semantic classification of the adjectives included in the study.

Epistemic Deontic Dynamic Evaluation Truth Obligation Potentiality Emotive Reaction

certain determined impossible afraid clear essential possible anxious

impossible important Human Attribute concerned

likely necessary apt delighted

possible Volition careful glad

true desirable content happy unlikely useful eager interesting

Perception keen pleased

sure proud sorry surprised surprising

General Evaluation good great lucky nice

Appropriateness appropriate fair natural right wise

9 The present classification deviates from the classification in Herriman (2000) on one point as the adjective important has been classified as expressing deontic modality rather than evaluation as in the classification in Herriman (2000: 597).


21

The distribution of the four semantic categories across clause type is given in Table 7.

There is variation between the type of clause and the modality expressed by the matrix

predicate. That-clauses predominantly express epistemic modality (67%) whereas to-clauses

show a more balanced distribution between epistemic modality (31%) and evaluation (33%)

and, to some extent, dynamic modality (21%).

Table 7. Distribution of semantic categories across clause type. Clause

Semantic Category Subtype to that Total

Epistemic Perception 1 <1% 105 27% 106 11%

Truth 171 31% 153 40% 324 34%

Epistemic Total 172 31% 258 67% 430 45%

Deontic Obligation 73 13% 15 4% 88 9%

Volition 11 2% 3 1% 14 2%

Deontic Total 84 15% 18 5% 102 11%

Dynamic Human Attribute 28 5% 2 1% 30 3%

Potentiality 91 16% - - 91 10%

Dynamic Total 119 21% 2 1% 121 13%

Evaluation Appropriateness 24 4% 12 3% 36 4%

Emotive Reaction 92 17% 82 21% 174 19%

General 66 12% 14 3% 80 8%

Evaluation Total 182 33% 108 27% 290 31%

Total 557 100% 386 100% 943 100%

In the following subsections, each semantic category will be treated separately.

2.1.1 Epistemic Modality

Epistemic modality is concerned with the truth value of the complement clause. There are

only eight predicates that express epistemic modality and yet they account for 45% of all

instances of that- and to-clauses in the subcorpus (see Table 7, section 2.1). However, two of

these predicates, possible and impossible, only express epistemic modality when

complemented by that-clauses. When complemented by to-clauses they instead express

dynamic modality (see Mair 1990: 49 and Herriman 2000: 597). The difference in modality

depending on which type of clause possible is complemented by is illustrated in (46) and (47).

(46) I suppose it's possible she could be having some sort of psychological block.

(BNC A73 2654) (47) It is possible to love, and to aid, thy neighbour without state intervention.

(BNC A1F 115) In (46), the that-clause forces an epistemic interpretation since possible here expresses

‘factual possibility’ and thus carries the meaning that something is ‘probable, likely to


22

happen.’ In (47) on the other hand, possible expresses ‘theoretical possibility’ and is therefore

dynamic since it carries the meaning ‘practicable, can be done' (see Mair 1990: 49).10 The

distribution of the adjectives expressing epistemic modality across clause type and

construction is given in Table 8.

Table 8. Distribution of epistemic predicates across clause type and construction. Clause Construction

to to Total that that Total Total

Predicate Extrap. Post-pr. Extrap. Post-pr.

Truth

certain (+) 8 8 2 12 14 22

clear (+) (+) - 58 1 59 59

impossible - - - 1 (-) 1 1

likely 13 123 136 27 (-) 27 163

possible - - - 16 (-) 16 16

true 2 (-) 2 21 (-) 21 23

unlikely 10 15 25 15 (-) 15 40

Perception

sure (-) 1 1 (-) 105 105 106

Total 25 147 172 140 118 258 430

Both Herriman (2000: 592) and Mair (1990: 25) have noted that predicates which express

epistemic modality are almost exclusively complemented by that-clauses. Since both

Herriman and Mair are concerned primarily with extraposed clauses this seems like a valid

claim as there are only 25 instances of epistemic predicates complemented by extraposed to-

clauses (Extrap. in Table 8). However, epistemic predicates complemented by post-

predicative to-clauses (Post-pr.) are very frequent, accounting for 34% of all epistemic

predicates (147/430). As seen in Table 8, the instances of epistemic predicates complemented

by post-predicative to-clauses are predominantly represented by the predicate likely

(123/147). This finding is supported by Biber et al. (1999: 718) who report that the predicate

(un)likely is the most frequent predicate complemented by post-predicative to-clauses. On the

other hand, epistemic predicates complemented by that-clauses are more frequently

represented by extraposed clauses (140/258) than by post-predicative clauses (118/258). More

interestingly, there is a strong parallelism between post-predicative to-clauses and extraposed

that-clauses complementing epistemic predicates. As seen in (48), a post-predicative to-clause

with an epistemic matrix predicate can be transformed into an extraposed that-clause (i.e.

many western companies are likely to... and it is likely that many western companies...).

10 Mair (1990: 49) also notes that the distinction between factual and theoretical possibility is the same as the semantic distinction between the modals may and can. Epistemic possible (complemented by a that-clause) can thus be paraphrased with may and dynamic possible (complemented by to-clauses) with can (see also Quirk et al 1985: 222-223) .


23

Similarly, the reversed transformation is shown in (49), i.e. an extraposed that-clause is

paralleled with a post-predicative to-clause (it was certain that the crash... and the crash wast

certain to...).

(48) Many Western companies, frustrated by restrictions on sales to the eastern bloc,

are likely to find the Soviet technology sales drive particularly galling. (BNC A1Y 96) (cf. It is likely that many western companies will find the Soviet technology

sales drive galling) (49) Perhaps nothing, but as she waited for money which didn't seem to be coming, it

was fairly certain the crash was going to mean something. (BNC A0U 2287) (cf. The crash was fairly certain to mean something) The adjectives likely and certain represent the impersonal/personal valency pattern as they

allow a change between the impersonal (extraposed) and personal pattern (post-predicative)

across the two clause types. Kiparsky & Kiparsky (1970: 147-148) state that all epistemic

predicates are non-factive, i.e. asserting rather than presupposing that the proposition

expressed in the complement clause is true. For example, in their cited example It is true that

John is ill, Kiparsky & Kiparsky state that the speaker is asserting that the proposition ‘John

is ill’ is true rather than presupposing its truth value. Kiparsky & Kiparsky (1970: 144) also

note that “there are constructions which are permissible only with non-factive predicates. One

such construction is obtained by turning the initial noun phrase of the subordinate [that]

clause into the subject of the main clause, and converting the remainder of the subordinate

clause into an infinitive phrase.” As a consequence, there is a strong correlation between

epistemic predicates and the valency possibilities specified for the impersonal/personal

pattern.

Furthermore, as shown in (48) and (49) and, as alluded to by the quote from Kiparsky &

Kiparsky (1970), epistemic predicates typically allow subject-to-subject raising. In (48), the

subject of the matrix clause, many western companies, becomes the subject of the transformed

that-clause. Along the same line, the subject of the that-clause in (49), the crash, becomes the

subject of the corresponding to-clause. Accordingly, there is a strong correlation between the

adjectives that express epistemic modality and two different factors: (i) valency pattern

(impersonal/personal) and (ii) grammatical pattern (subject-to-subject raising), as summarised

in Table 9.


24

Table 9. Structural properties of epistemic predicates. Predicate Subtype Subject-Raising Impersonal/Personal certain Truth + +

cleara Truth (+) +

likely Truth + + sure Perception + - true Truth - - unlikely Truth + + a As seen in Table 8, there are no instances of clear complemented by to-clauses but clear is nonetheless a subject-raising predicate as this example from Herbst et al. (2004: 137) shows: Hirst is clear to hit the UEFA

Cup trail tomorrow after his first action since cracking an ankle at Arsenal seven weeks ago with the transform It is clear that Hirst will hit the UEFA Cup trail tomorrow...

The adjectives possible and impossible are not included in Table 9 since they express dynamic

modality when complemented by to-clauses. Table 9 shows that the adjective true is not a

member of the impersonal/personal valency pattern. It is restricted to complementation by

extraposed clauses only and true is therefore treated as belonging to the grammatical pattern

of extraposed clauses only. The adjective sure, on the other hand, is ambiguous as to which

valency pattern it belongs. Herbst et al. (2004: 833) list sure as unable to be complemented by

extraposed clauses whereas Quirk et al. (1985: 1228) includes sure among those adjectives

that can be complemented by both post-predicative to-clauses and extraposed that-clauses, in

the same way as likely and certain in (48) and (49). Similarly, Huddleston & Pullum (2002:

964) state that sure occasionally is complemented by extraposed that-clauses as in their cited

example it now seems sure there’ll be an election before the end of the year. Cowan (2008:

481), in line with Herbst et al (2004: 833) states that sure is the only subject-raising adjective

that do not allow an extraposed that-clause. The corpus evidence does not give conclusive

evidence to fully support either side. It has already been noted that there are no examples of

sure complemented by an extraposed that-clause in the subcorpus. A search for the strings “it

is sure that” and “it seems sure that” in the full version of the BNC only gives two examples,

both instances of sure complemented by an extraposed that-clause, as in (50).

(50) This is not the occasion to discuss the process by which segmentally organized

societies developed into vertically structured ones, though it is sure that

significant clues will be found in the elaboration of the material symbols of emulation and status embodied in precious substances. (BNC FBA 114)

A search for the string “it [be|seem] sure that” in COCA, a corpus consisting of almost 500

million words, only gives three examples of sure complemented by an extraposed that-clause.

An additional search for the string “it [be|seem] [r*] sure that”, where “r*” stands for any

adverb, only provides one single example, given in (51). This search was conducted based on


25

the intuition that the presence of a modifier, such as quite in (51), would give more

acceptability to a sentence in which sure is complemented by an extraposed that-clause.

(51) So it 's quite sure that they're going to continue to be deployed and they will

make the workings of products in our lives, watches, cars, ovens, television

sets, thermostats, it will make them better, cheaper, easier, do their jobs

better. (COCA ABC_ Nightline 1997) Since there is only one example of an adverb modifying sure in COCA and there are no

examples of the search string “it is quite/fairly sure that” in the BNC suggest that this intuition

does not hold. It is possible to conclude, however, that sure very rarely, rather than

occasionally, is complemented by extraposed that-clauses as the very few instances from the

BNC and COCA show.

Since an extraposed that-clause transform is only marginally possible with sure the subject

raising property has to be accounted for in a different way. A comparison of sure with the

dynamic predicate eager, shown in (52) and (53), shows that both sure and eager are

primarily compatible with the personal pattern, as seen by the marginal acceptability of the

extraposed transform of sure in (52) and the unacceptability of the extraposed transform of

eager in (53).

(52) In drawing attention to many such embarrassments, Davie's book is sure to

provoke a good deal of rancour in certain circles. (BNC A2J 17) (cf. */?It is sure that Davie’s book will provoke a good deal of rancour...) (≠ Davie’s book is sure)

(53) And Shimon Peres is eager to avoid a showdown which may lead to his

ouster as leader of the Labour Party." (BNC A2X 135) (cf. *It is eager that Shimon Peres avoids a showdown...) (= Shimon Peres is eager)

However, eager, as a member of the semantic category of dynamic modality does not allow

subject-to-subject raising whereas sure does. Consequently, whereas the subject of the matrix

clause in (53), Shimon Peres, is co-referential with the absent subject of the to-clause, i.e.

carries the implication ‘Shimon Peres is eager’, the same is not true with sure in (52). In (52),

on the contrary, the subject of the matrix clause, Davie’s book, is not co-referential with the

implied subject of the to-clause, i.e. it does not carry the implication that ‘Davie’s book is

sure.’ Instead in (52), the whole proposition of the to-clause is needed and it thus carries the

implication that ‘for Davie’s book to provoke a good deal of rancour is sure.’ In other words,


26

in order to complete the proposition in (52) the subject of the matrix clause has to be taken

together with the entire to-clause.

2.1.2 Deontic Modality

Deontic modality is concerned with human control over events and imposing one’s will on

other agents (Herriman 2000: 585). There are two different subtypes of deontic predicates in

the subcorpus. The predicates desirable and useful express deontic volition, exemplified in

(54), whereas determined, essential, important and necessary express deontic obligation,

exemplified in (55).

(54) In some cases it will be desirable to exercise the power available under

section 18 to take into custody and return an absconder. (BNC FBJ 817) (55) It is essential that the modern Labour Party should not be in hock to the

unions. (BNC A1F 299) Deontic modality is the semantic category which accounts for the lowest number of instances

in the subcorpus as the six adjectives expressing deontic modality account for only 11% of all

predicates (see Table 7, section 2.1). The distribution of the deontic predicates across clause

type and construction is given in Table 10. Deontic predicates are far more commonly

complemented by to-clauses (84/102) than by that-clauses (18/102 in Table 10). Furthermore,

there are no instances of deontic predicates complemented by post-predicative that-clauses in

Table 10 and there are relatively few instances of post-predicative to-clauses (15/84).

Table 10. Distribution of deontic predicates across clause type and construction. Clause Construction



Obligation

determined (-) 2 2 (+) (+) - 2

essential 5 1 6 3 (-) 3 9

important 25 1 26 10 (-) 10 36

necessary 28 11 39 2 (-) 2 41

Volition

desirable 2 (-) 2 3 (-) 3 5

useful 9 (+) 9 (+) (-) - 9

Total 69 15 84 18 - 18 102

Although deontic predicates are most frequently complemented by extraposed clauses, they

are not members of the impersonal pattern. Instead, most of the deontic predicates are

included in the impersonal/personal pattern as they have the valency possibility of being


27

complemented by an extraposed that-clause as well as a post-predicative to-clause (as seen in

Table 10, all deontic predicates except desirable have this valency possibility). It was also

noted in section 2.1.1 that epistemic predicates typically belong to the impersonal/personal

valency pattern. However, deontic predicates, unlike epistemic predicates, do not allow

subject-to-subject raising, instead the subject of the matrix clause is co-referential with the

subject of the to-clause. The fact that the subject of the matrix clause is co-referential with the

subject of the complement clause with deontic predicates is shown in (56) and (57) with the

predicate important.

(56) Bevin, in response to Attlee's scepticism about Britain's Mediterranean posture,

argued that the stability of the area was enormously important to prevent war. (BNC A6G 752) (cf. *It was important that the stability of the area would prevent war)

(cf. *For the stability of the area to prevent war was important) (57) It's important that you mix with people, that you get out and about, because if

you find that everybody else is, is getting up the hill faster than you and everybody else is crossing the roads quicker than you. (BNC G4G 62) (cf. *You are important to mix with people)

As seen in (56), the post-predicative to-clause does not allow raising of the subject from the

matrix clause to the subject of the that-clause in the transformation within parenthesis. This is

further exemplified by the fact that an insertion of the matrix subject the stability of the area

as a for-subject in an extraposed to-clause is not possible. Similarly, the subject of the

extraposed that-clause in (57) cannot move to become the subject of the matrix clause of the

transformed post-predicative to-clause. The reason behind this restriction is thus that a

structural characteristic of deontic predicates is that the matrix subject is co-referential with

the implied subject of the post-predicative to-clause. Thus the prototypical structural

properties of deontic predicates include the grammatical feature of co-referential subjects and

the impersonal/personal valency pattern, as summarised in Table 11.

Table 11. Structural properties of deontic predicates. Predicate Subtype Co-referential

Subjects Impersonal/Personal

desirable Volition - - determined Obligation + + essential Obligation + + important Obligation + + necessary Obligation + + useful Volition - +


28

As already noted, desirable is not part of the impersonal/personal valency pattern; since it

only can be complemented by extraposed clauses it is part of the impersonal valency pattern.

Since desirable does not allow complementation by post-predicative to-clauses, it cannot be

assigned any grammatical feature other than ‘restricted to extraposed clauses only.’

Furthermore, Table 10 shows that there are no examples of useful complemented by post-

predicative to-clauses in the subcorpus. In fact, useful is differentiated from the other deontic

predicates as it allows object-to-subject raising (see section 2.1.3 for a discussion of object-to-

subject raising).11

2.1.3 Dynamic Modality The semantic category of dynamic modality is made up of two different subtypes which are

somewhat different from each other. Dynamic potentiality, represented by the predicates

possible and impossible when complemented by to-clauses (remember that these two

predicates express epistemic modality when complemented by that-clauses, see section 2.1.1),

is concerned with the potential success of the content in the complement clause. The second

subtype, human attribute, represented by the remaining six dynamic predicates in Table 10,

expresses opinions about properties or dispositions which are attributed to the subject of the

matrix clause. Dynamic potentiality is exemplified in (58) and human attribute is shown in

(59).

(58) Good afternoon, erm I wonder if it's possible to book a table for high tea on er

Tuesday the twenty first, that's er Easter Tuesday (BNC KDU 151) (59) He was always careful to wash his chiselled visage, of course, but in a year of

passion one would think some small scent would have escaped, a tracking odour that would put her senses on alert. (BNC A0U 895)

The fact that these two subtypes are different from each other is also seen in the distribution

of the dynamic predicates across clause type and construction. Table 12 shows that the

dynamic potentiality predicates possible and impossible are the only instances of dynamic

predicates complemented by extraposed to-clauses. In addition, the predicates expressing

human attribute are always complemented by post-predicative to-clauses although the

predicate proud also is attested in the subcorpus as complemented by post-predicative that-

clauses.

11 The following example from Herbst et al. (2004: 915) shows that useful allows object-to-subject raising: That’s useful to know cf. It is useful to know that.


29

Table 12. Distribution of dynamic predicates across clause type and construction. Clause Construction



Potentiality

impossible 25 10 35 - - - 35

possible 56 (-) 56 - - - 56

Human Attribute

apt (-) 2 2 (+) (-) - 2

careful (-) 10 10 (-) (+) - 10

content (-) 3 3 (-) (+) - 3

eager (-) 4 4 (-) (+) - 4

keen (-) 8 8 (-) (+) - 8

proud (-) 1 1 (-) 2 2 3

Total 81 38 119 - 2 2 121

It is thus possible to conclude that dynamic predicates expressing potentiality are solely

complemented by extraposed to-clauses whereas dynamic predicates expressing human

attribute are almost invariably complemented by post-predicative to-clauses. Furthermore, as

seen in Table 13, all predicates expressing human attribute, except apt, have co-referential

subjects and belong to the personal valency pattern. The predicates expressing potentiality, on

the other hand, are neither members of the personal valency pattern nor do they have co-

referential subjects.

Table 13. Structural properties of dynamic predicates. Predicate Subtype Co-referential Subjects Personal Pattern apt Human Attribute - - careful Human Attribute + + content Human Attribute + + eager Human Attribute + + impossible Potentiality - - keen Human Attribute + + possible Potentiality - - proud Human Attribute + +

The potentiality predicate possible does not allow complementation by post-predicative to-

clauses and, as member of the impersonal valency pattern, only allows complementation by

extraposed clauses. The potentiality predicate impossible, on the other hand, is a member of

the impersonal/personal valency pattern. It does not, however, allow subject-to-subject raising

as the epistemic members of the impersonal/personal valency pattern nor does it have co-

referential subjects as the deontic members of the impersonal/personal valency pattern.

Instead, the dynamic predicate impossible allows object-to-subject raising. As seen in (60),


30

the subject of the matrix clause these songs becomes the object of the corresponding

extraposed clause within parenthesis (i.e. these songs are impossible to use and it is

impossible to use these songs).

(60) Not only are these songs impossible to use dramatically, they're also too vague

to use as incidental music, to underline or punctuate aspects of Holly's life or the 1950s more generally. (BNC A5E 188) (cf. Not only is it impossible to use these songs dramatically...)

Finally, Table 13 also shows that the predicate apt is neither a member of the personal pattern

nor does it possess the grammatical feature of co-referential subjects. In fact, apt behaves very

much like epistemic predicates as it is a member of the impersonal/personal pattern as well as

it allows subject-to-subject-raising, as seen in (61) (i.e. Christ was apt to... and It was apt that

Christ...).

(61) Christ was very apt to tell Margery to give up things she had become tired

of; he was later to tell her to eat meat again. (BNC CFX 690) (cf. It was very apt that Christ told Margery to give up things...) However, as noted by Perkins (1983: 74) and as seen in (61), when apt is complemented by

an extraposed that-clause it refers to the suitability of the content in the complement clause

and therefore expresses evaluative rather than dynamic modality. In other words, although apt

is a subject-raising predicate, it differs from the epistemic predicates as it, when

complemented by a post-predicative that-clause expresses dynamic modality whereas when

complemented by an extraposed that-clause it expresses evaluation.

2.1.4 Evaluation

The semantic category of evaluation consists of, by far, the largest number of predicates. In

total, 20 out of the 40 predicates included in this study are evaluative predicates. Despite the

large number of different predicates, they only constitute 31% (290/943) of the total number

of instances included in the study (see Table 7, section 2.1). The evaluative predicates are

further divided into three different subtypes of which evaluative predicates expressing

emotive reaction is the largest, represented by eleven different predicates (see Table 14). The

other two subtypes include general evaluative predicates and appropriateness predicates. The

three subtypes are exemplified in (62)-(64).


31

(62) Not long after the nomes moved into the quarry a fox was surprised and delighted to come across a couple of unwary berry-gatherers, which it ate.

(BNC HTH 345) (63) And somebody with his influence and power, it's good to have him on our side,

as it were. (BNC FLE 152) (64) It is appropriate that, for the first staging of the Heineken Trophy, hockey's

answer to football's Charity Shield, the country's two foremost clubs should

meet: Hounslow, the Hockey Association Cup-winners, and Southgate, the National League champions. (BNC A5C 283)

As seen, evaluative predicates expressing emotive reaction, such as surprised and delighted in

(62), typically include a stronger component of emotive evaluation in the complement clause

than the predicates representing general evaluation, such as good in (63), which, as the name

suggests, give a more neutral or general evaluation of the content in the complement clause.

In (64), the archetypical evaluative appropriateness predicate appropriate simply evaluates

the appropriateness of the content in the complement clause, again with a more neutral or

general evaluation, at least when compared to the predicates expressing emotive reaction.

The overall distribution of evaluative predicates across clause type and construction is

given in Table 14. As seen, to-clauses (182/290) more frequently complement evaluative

predicates than that-clauses (108/290) do.


32

Table 14. Distribution of evaluative predicates across clause type and construction.

Clause Construction



Emotive Reaction

afraid (-) 5 5 (-) 23 23 28

anxious (-) 16 16 (-) 1 1 17

concerned (-) 4 4 (-) 5 5 9

delighted (-) 4 4 (-) (+) - 4

pleased (-) 7 7 (-) 3 3 10

glad (-) 6 6 (-) 20 20 26

happy (-) 22 22 (-) 1 1 23

interesting 9 (-) 9 2 (-) 2 11

sorry (-) 8 8 (-) 10 10 18

surprised (-) 9 9 (-) 5 5 14

surprising 2 (-) 2 12 (-) 12 14 General Evaluation

good 42 2 44 5 (-) 5 49

great 4 (+) 4 1 (-) 1 5

lucky (-) 5 5 (+) 4 4 9

nice 13 (+) 13 4 (-) 4 17

Appropriateness

appropriate 10 (+) 10 2 (-) 2 12

fair 1 (-) 1 1 (-) 1 2

natural 3 (-) 3 2 (-) 2 5

right 3 2 5 4 3 7 12

wise 2 3 5 (+) (-) - 5

Total 89 93 182 33 75 108 290

In addition, to-clauses are quite evenly distributed between extraposed (89/182) and post-

predicative (93/182) clauses, whereas the majority of that-clauses are represented by post-

predicative (75/108) clauses. All in all, compared to the other three semantic categories,

evaluative predicates appear to display greater variation across clause type and construction.

However, when examining the structural properties of the evaluative predicates it becomes

clear that they possess the same structural distinctness as the predicates of the other three

semantic categories.

Evaluative predicates form two rather distinct groups depending on which subtype they

represent. The evaluative predicates expressing emotive reaction form one group and the

general and appropriateness evaluative predicates form another. The predicates expressing

emotive reaction form a rather homogeneous group of predicates which are prototypically

members of the personal valency pattern and have the grammatical feature of co-referential

subjects. As seen in Table 15, the only two predicates which express emotive reaction but do

not belong to the personal valency pattern nor exhibit the grammatical feature of co-


33

referential subjects are the predicates interesting and surprising, two predicates which do not

have the valency possibility of being complemented by post-predicative clauses and therefore

only allow complementation by extraposed clauses.

Table 15. Structural properties of evaluative predicates expressing emotive reaction. Predicate Co-referential Subjects Personal Pattern afraid + + anxious + + concerned + + delighted + + glad + + happy + + interesting - - pleased + + sorry + + surprised + + surprising - -

The members of the other group, consisting of general and appropriateness evaluative

predicates, are prototypically members of the impersonal/personal valency pattern as well as

displaying the grammatical feature that, when complemented by a to-clause, the to-clause can

be omitted without causing ungrammaticality. As seen in Table 16, again there are two

predicates that are differentiated from the others as they do not exhibit the prototypical

structural features that the other predicates do. In the same way as interesting and surprising,

fair and natural are not part of the impersonal/personal valency pattern as they are restricted

to complementation by extraposed clauses only and as such cannot be complemented by post-

predicative to-clauses.

Table 16. Structural properties of general and appropriateness evaluative predicates. Predicate Subtype Raising Type Optional to-clause Impersonal/Personal

appropriatea Appropriateness Object (+) +

fair Appropriateness - - - good General Evaluation Object + +

greatb General Evaluation Object (+) +

lucky General Evaluation Subject + + natural Appropriateness - - -

nicec General Evaluation Object (+) +

right Appropriateness Subject + + wise Appropriateness Subject + + a Although there are no examples of appropriate complemented by a post-predicative to-clause in the subcorpus, appropriate still have the prototypical structural properties of general evaluative predicates allowing object-to-subject raising as in This was not appropriate for government to fund, yet just about every government body thought it should be done (adopted from Herbst et al. 2004: 45) cf. It was not appropriate for the government to

fund this... b See note a above: He’s great to have around because he’s bubbly with a terrific personality (adopted from Herbst et al. 2004: 359) cf. It is great to have him around because he’s bubbly with a terrific personality. c See note a above: Information about music is nice to know, but one has to be musical to be touched by music

and have a richer life (adopted from Herbst et al. 2004: 551) cf. It is nice to know information about music...


34

The predicates with the grammatical feature of having an optional to-clause are very similar

to the epistemic predicates that allow subject-to-subject raising, such as likely in (48),

repeated below as (65), and the dynamic predicate impossible which allow object-to-subject

raising, as in (60), repeated below as (68).

(65) Anarchists are right to think that it can never be made, for contingent reasons

only and not because of any inconsistency in the notion of a rational justification for authority, nor in the notion of authority over moral agents. (BNC ANH 318)

(cf. It is right that anarchists think that it can never be made) (Anarchists are right) (66) Many Western companies, frustrated by restrictions on sales to the eastern bloc,

are likely to find the Soviet technology sales drive particularly galling. (BNC A1Y 96) (cf. It is likely that many western companies will find the Soviet technology

sales drive galling) (*Many western companies are likely) As seen in (65), the evaluative predicate right allows subject-to-subject raising in the same

way as the epistemic predicate likely in (66) (i.e. Anarchists are right to... and It is right that

anarchists...). The evaluative predicate right is also differentiated from the epistemic

predicates by the fact that the to-clause in (65) can be omitted without causing

ungrammaticality. Furthermore, as seen in (67), good resembles the object-to-subject raising

predicate impossible in (68).

(67) And somebody with his influence and power, it's good to have him on our side,

as it were. (BNC FLE 152) (cf. He is good to have on our side

(He is good) (68) Not only are these songs impossible to use dramatically, they're also too vague

to use as incidental music, to underline or punctuate aspects of Holly's life or the 1950s more generally. (BNC A5E 188) (cf. Not only is it impossible to use these songs dramatically...)

(*Not only is it impossible) The object of the to-clause in (67), him, can move and become the subject of the

corresponding post-predicative to-clause. In other words, evaluative predicates such as good

behaves very much the same as the dynamic predicate impossible as they both allow object-

to-subject raising but again with the ability of evaluative predicates of allowing an optional

to-clause.


35

2.2 Register Variation

The semantic categorisation of the 40 different adjectival predicates included in this study

has, among other things, defined and delimited four different categories with a varying

number of semantic subtypes. These categories and subtypes have certain different

distinguishing features which are linked to the semantics of the predicates. Each category

together with its subtypes has thus been generalised to express a certain proposition. By

examining the register distribution of these semantic categories, it is possible to distinguish

which types of categories most frequently occur in a specific register and give insight into the

types of propositions that most frequently are expressed in particular registers.

Table 17 shows that the academic register (334/943) is the register with the highest number

of adjectives complemented by that- and to-clauses, followed by press (241/943), spoken

material (185/943) and fiction (183/943).

Table. 17. Register distribution of semantic categories and subtypes. Register

Semantic Category Subtype Academic Fiction Press Spoken Total

Epistemic Perception 2 1% 52 28% 13 5% 39 21% 106

Truth 165 49% 25 14% 110 46% 24 13% 324

Epistemic Total 167 50% 77 42% 123 51% 63 34% 430

Deontic Obligation 54 16% 5 3% 12 5% 17 9% 88

Volition 9 3% - - 1 <1% 4 2% 14

Deontic Total 63 19% 5 3% 13 5% 21 11% 102

Dynamic Human Attribute 11 3% 8 4% 8 3% 3 2% 30

Potentiality 42 13% 12 7% 28 12% 9 5% 91

Dynamic Total 53 16% 20 11% 36 15% 12 7% 121

Evaluation Appropriateness 11 3% 3 2% 11 5% 11 6% 36

Emotive Reaction 32 10% 56 30% 45 19% 41 22% 174

General 8 2% 22 12% 13 5% 37 20% 80

Evaluation Total 51 15% 81 44% 69 29% 89 48% 290

Total 334 100% 183 100% 241 100% 185 100% 943

There is also variation between the different semantic categories and their register

distribution. Epistemic predicates are fairly frequent in all registers although the press (51%)

and the academic register (50%) stand out as the registers which have the highest number of

epistemic predicates. Fiction and the spoken register, on the other hand, have their highest

number of predicates in the semantic category of evaluation (44% and 48% respectively).

Evaluative predicates, furthermore, are very infrequent in the academic register as they only

account for 15% of the total number of predicates in the academic register.

The register distribution of the three valency patterns also shows that the academic and the

press register are differentiated from fiction and the spoken register. Table 18 shows that the


36

academic and the press register have the highest number of adjectives belonging to the

impersonal/personal valency pattern (60% and 56% respectively). Fiction and the spoken

register, on the other hand, stand out as the two registers with the highest number of

adjectives belonging to the personal valency pattern (62% and 42% respectively).

Table 18. Register distribution of valency patterns.

The register distribution across semantic categories and valency patterns shows that there is a

strong correlation between these two factors. Furthermore, the register distribution also shows

that the academic and the press register are differentiated from fiction and the spoken register.

The register distribution of semantic categories will be considered further in section 3. In

the following section, section 2.3, a summary of the correlation between semantic categories

and valency patterns will be given.

2.3 Semantic Categories and Valency Patterns - Summary

Throughout sections 2.1.1-2.1.4 it has been shown that there is a strong correlation between

(i) the semantics of different predicates, (ii) the valency pattern they belong to, (iii) the

grammatical pattern they allow. Table 19 serves as a summary of the correlation between

these three factors. As seen in Table 19, 66% of the epistemic predicates are predicates that

belong to the impersonal/personal valency pattern as they allow subject-to-subject raising, a

process which typically require a change between an extraposed that-clause into a post-

predicative to-clause. The instances of epistemic predicates that belong to the personal

valency pattern (25%) are all instances of the predicate sure which is the only predicate that

belong to the personal valency pattern and still allow subject-to-subject raising (see section

2.1.1). The remaining 39 instances of epistemic predicates are those that belong to the

impersonal valency pattern and, as such, can only be complemented by extraposed clauses.

Register

Valency Pattern Academic Fiction Press Spoken Total

Impersonal 104 31% 15 8% 44 18% 19 10% 182

Personal 29 9% 114 62% 62 26% 78 42% 283

Impersonal/Personal 201 60% 54 30% 135 56% 88 48% 478

Total 334 100% 183 100% 241 100% 185 100% 943


37

Table 19. The distribution of semantic categories across valency pattern. Valency Pattern Semantic Category Subtype Impersonal Personal Imp./Per. Total

Epistemic Perception - - 106 25% - - 106 25%

Truth 39 9% - - 285 66% 324 75%

Epistemic Total 39 9% 106 25% 285 66% 430 100%

Deontic Obligation - - - - 88 86% 88 86%

Volition 5 5% - - 9 9% 14 14%

Deontic Total 5 5% - - 97 95% 102 100%

Dynamic Human Attribute - - 28 23% 2 2% 30 25%

Potentiality 56 46% - - 35 29% 91 75%

Dynamic Total 56 46% 28 23% 37 31% 121 100%

Evaluation Appropriateness 2 >1% - - 34 12% 36 12%

Emotive Reaction 25 9% 149 51% - - 174 60%

General - - - - 80 28% 80 28%

Evaluation Total 27 9% 149 51% 114 40% 290 100%

As seen in Table 19 and as noted in section 2.1.2, deontic predicates are distributed quite

differently compared to epistemic predicates. Deontic predicates, almost exclusively, belong

to the impersonal/personal valency pattern and to the grammatical pattern of co-referential

subjects (95%). The only exception to this distribution is the predicate desirable (representing

the remaining 5% in Table 19) which belongs to the impersonal valency pattern and, as such,

can only be complemented by extraposed clauses.

The dynamic predicates are more diverse than both epistemic and deontic predicates. As

seen, and as noted in section 2.1.3, the dynamic predicates are fairly evenly distributed across

the three valency patterns even though the prototypical structural properties, identified in

section 2.1.3, stated that dynamic predicates typically are members of the personal pattern and

have the grammatical feature of co-referential subjects. The two potentiality predicates

possible and impossible which belong to the impersonal and the impersonal/personal valency

pattern are responsible for the diverse distribution of the dynamic predicates as the two of

them together account for 75% of all dynamic predicates. Finally, the predicates expressing

evaluation form two distinct groups, as noted in section 2.1.4. The evaluative predicates that

express emotive reaction predominantly belong to the personal pattern and have the

grammatical feature of co-referential subjects (51% in Table 19). The evaluative predicates

that express appropriateness and general evaluation (12% and 28% respectively) belong

almost exclusively to the impersonal/personal valency pattern and have the grammatical

feature of allowing an optional to-clause.


38

3. Factors Influencing the Choice Between that- and to-clauses

Whereas section 2 was primarily concerned with semantic and structural properties of the

different predicates included in this study, the present section seeks to identify different

functional properties associated with each clause type. In other words, the present section will

contrast and compare different parallelisms between adjectives complemented by that- and to-

clauses and identify and discuss different factors that influence the choice between that- and

to-clauses.

3.1 For-subjects and the Extraposed Parallelism

For-subjects, introduced in section 1.1.2, serve as a means of introducing a subject in a to-

clause. Whereas that-clauses always have subjects, to-clauses, due to the fact that they are

infinitival, require for-subjects for marking of subjects. There is a total of 30 instances of for-

subjects in the subcorpus of which 27 occur with extraposed to-clauses. Consequently, the

remaining three instances are complemented by post-predicative to-clauses (see section 3.3

for a discussion of post-predicative to-clauses with for-subjects). Furthermore, there are

eleven different adjectival matrix predicates that are complemented by to-clauses with for-

subjects, listed in Table 20. Extraposed to-clauses with for-subjects are rare compared to

subjectless extraposed clauses, as they only account for 10% of the total number of extraposed

to-clauses in the subcorpus (27/264, see Table 4, section 2.1 for the total number of

extraposed to-clauses).12

Table 20. Distribution of adjectives complemented by extraposed to-clauses with for-subjects. Complement

Adjective to for-subjects that

appropriate 10 5 2

essential 5 1 3

good 42 3 5

important 25 1 10

impossible 25 3 1

interesting 9 2 2

natural 3 2 1

necessary 28 3 2

possible 56 6 16

useful 9 1 (+)

wise 2 1 (+)

Total 214 27 42

12 Collins (1994: 9) reports, in his study of Australian English, that 12% of all extraposed to-clauses are represented by for-subjects.


39

Since all that-clauses have subjects, it is interesting to compare extraposed to-clauses with

for-subjects to extraposed that-clauses. As shown in (69), an extraposed to-clause with a for-

subject can be paralleled with an extraposed that-clause.

(69) That having been said, where gaps appear in the Code it would be better for

them to be filled by a change in the Code itself rather than by judicial

interpretation. (BNC FBJ 1012) (cf. That having been said, where gaps appear in the Code it would be better that they are filled by a change in the Code itself rather than by judicial

interpretation.)

The for-subject of the to-clause in (69) can serve as the subject of a corresponding that-clause,

as shown in parenthesis in (69). The low number of extraposed to-clauses with for-subjects

makes it hard to draw any conclusions about their frequency distribution. Table 20, however,

shows that certain adjectives are far more likely than others to be complemented by an

extraposed to-clause with a for-subject. For example, appropriate is represented by twelve

extraposed occurrences in the subcorpus of which ten are subjectless to-clauses and two are

that-clauses. Furthermore, there are five instances of appropriate complemented by an

extraposed to-clause with a for-subject. It is thus possible to state that the preferred

complementation order of appropriate is (i) subjectless extraposed to-clause (ii) extraposed

to-clause with for-subject (iii) extraposed that-clause.

In contrast, Table 20 shows that important has a different complementation order as, out of

the 35 instances of important complemented by extraposed clauses, 25 are subjectless to-

clauses, ten are that-clauses and only one is an extraposed to-clause with a for-subject. The

preferred complementation order of important is thus (i) subjectless extraposed to-clause (ii)

extraposed that-clause (iii) extraposed to-clause with for-subject.

There are additional factors involved between complementation by an extraposed that-

clause or an extraposed to-clause with a for-subject. As seen in (70), the presence of the PP

for the first staging of the Heineken Trophy makes it a dispreferred environment for a to-

clause with a for-subject since it requires that the for-PP is followed by a for-subject.

(70) It is appropriate that, for the first staging of the Heineken Trophy, hockey's

answer to football's Charity Shield, the country's two foremost clubs should

meet: Hounslow, the Hockey Association Cup-winners, and Southgate, the National League champions. (BNC A5C 283) (cf. It is appropriate, for the first staging of the Heineken Trophy, hockey’s answer to football’s Charity Shield, for the country’s two foremost clubs to

meet)


40

Mair (1990: 47) also mentions that that-clauses much more readily than to-clauses with for-

subjects allow separation between the complementizer (i.e. that or to) and the subject of the

complement clause. In other words, separation between the subject introducing particle for

and the subject in to-clauses is, if not ungrammatical, at least very awkward as it becomes

hard to identify the clause boundaries when processing the sentence, as seen in (71).13

(71) ?It is appropriate for, for the first staging of the Heineken Trophy, hockey’s

answer to fottball’s Charity Shield, the country’s two foremost clubs to meet. A third structural variant would, of course, be to front the for-prepositional phrase but besides

changing the information structure of the sentence this does not change the fact that there are

still two for-phrases present, as seen in (72).

(72) For the first staging of the Heineken Trophy, hockey’s answer to fottball’s

Charity Shield, it is appropriate for the country’s two foremost clubs to meet. The strongest factor favouring extraposed that-clauses rather than extraposed to-clauses with

for-subjects is that the finite verb phrase in the that-clause can be marked for tense or

modality, as in (73). In fact, 64% (27/42) of the extraposed that-clauses complementing those

adjectives that also allow extraposed to-clauses with for-subjects are marked for tense or

modality.

(73) A Minority Government will hardly be able to deal with the situation, and it is

quite possible that Your Majesty might be asked to approve of a National

Government. (BNC A6G 132) (cf. A Minority Government will hardly be able to deal with the situation, and it is quite possible for Your Majesty to be asked to approve of a National

Government) As seen in (73), the modal might can only be present in the finite that-clause. In other words,

the modality carried by might cannot be conveyed in the to-clause.

Finally, as seen in (73), there is an infinitive embedded in the that-clause. When (73) is

changed into an extraposed to-clause with a for-subject the result is that one infinitive is

embedded within another (for Your Majesty to be asked to approve). In order to avoid the

stacking of several infinitival clauses, a that-clause might prove to be the preferred

13 Rohdenburg (1995: 368 ff) also describes the preference for that-clauses over to-clauses in instances such as (70) by his complexity/transparancy principle: “the less directly the dependent clause [complement clause] is linked to its superordinate clause [matrix clause], or the more complex the dependent clause turns out to be, the greater is the need to mark its sentential status more explicit.” (Rohdenburg 1995: 368)


41

construction in cases like this. Similarly, in (74), the fact that the to-clause is embedded

within a that-clause might favour the use of the to-clause rather than a that-clause.

(74) I think that it's very important for people who smoke not to blame themselves,

it is not their fault they smoke. (BNC FLM 295) (cf. I think that it's very important that people who smoke do not blame

themselves, it is not their fault they smoke) When an extraposed that-clause has an indicative verb, however, as in (75), and none of

the factors discussed in (70) and (73) do apply, it is very hard to determine why this structure

is preferred to an extraposed to-clause with a for-subject.

(75) It is necessary, however, that society recognises the importance of caring for

others as a fundamental part of living. (BNC A27 53) (cf. It is necessary, however, for society to recognise the importance of caring

for others as a fundamental part of living)

As a consequence, in examples such as (74), Mair (1990: 47) suggests that extraposed that-

clauses and extraposed to-clauses with for-subjects are more or less in free variation.

3.2 More on the Extraposed Parallelism

The discussion of factors influencing the choice between extraposed that-clauses and

extraposed to-clauses with for-subjects in section 3.1, largely extends to the factors that

influence the choice between extraposed that-clauses and subjectless extraposed to-clauses.

Table 21 shows the distribution of those adjectives that are attested as complemented by both

extraposed that- and subjectless to-clauses in the subcorpus. In other words, Table 21 does not

include all instances of extraposed that- and to-clauses, instead it only includes instances of

those adjectives that are attested as complemented by both that- and to-clauses. As a

consequence, there is some overlap between the adjectives in Table 21 that are complemented

by subjectless extraposed to-clauses and the adjectives in section 3.1 that are complemented

by extraposed to-clauses with for-subjects.


42

Table 21. Distribution of extraposed clauses. Clause

Adjective to that Total

appropriate 5 2 12

desirable 2 3 5

essential 4 3 8

fair 1 1 2

good 39 5 47

great 4 1 5

important 24 10 35

impossible 22 1 26

interesting 7 2 11

likely 13 27 40

natural 1 2 5

necessary 25 2 30

nice 13 4 17

possible 50 16 72

right 3 4 7

surprising 2 12 14

true 2 21 23

unlikely 10 15 25

Total 227 131 358

Table 21 shows that subjectless extraposed to-clauses are more frequent than extraposed that-

clauses. When the to-clause is subjectless, as in (76), a corresponding that-clause causes

redundancy since a subject has to be inserted in the that-clause, as seen by the insertion of

‘anticipatory it’ in the corresponding that-clause in (76) (cf. Mair 1990: 78).

(76) But outside her room, Mildred was just a common frog who had strayed into the

school, where it would be unlikely to occur to anyone (except the wicked

person who had done the deed) that it might be a second-year witch under

an enchantment. (BNC CCA 254) (cf. it would be unlikely that it would occur to anyone (except the wicked

person who had done the deed) that it might be a second-year witch under

an enchantment)

With other predicates, in order to transform an extraposed subjectless to-clause into a

corresponding that-clause, the insertion of ‘inclusive we’ (Quirk et al. 1985: 350) or an

indefinite pronoun (e.g. everyone or anyone) as subject is necessary, as seen in (77) and (78).

(77) In times of disorientation, intellectual or otherwise, it is sometimes best to stick

to the familiar, cling to the known. (BNC A0U 1934) (cf. it is sometimes best that we stick to the familiar, that we cling to the

known)


43

(78) It is important to remember that a government's power can and normally

does quite properly extend to people who do not accept its authority. (BNC ANH 1120)

(cf. it is important that everyone remembers that a government's power can

and normally does quite properly extend to people who do not accept its

authority)

The fact that generic subjects have to be inserted in order to convert an extraposed subjectless

to-clause into a corresponding that-clause suggests that these structures are not in direct

rivalry with each other. Instead, the non-existence of examples of generic subjects in that-

clauses, as in the corresponding that-clauses in (76), (77) and (78), suggests that extraposed

that-clauses are used when a referring subject is needed and extraposed subjectless to-clauses

are used when the reference of a subject does not need to be specified. That is not to say that

the absent subject in a to-clause does not have a referential dependence with the matrix

subject. The concept of ‘control’ or ‘Equi-NP deletion’ (see Postal 1970: 443 and Hornstein

1999: 69) stipulates that the matrix subject (the controller) controls the reference of the absent

subject in the to-clause.

The ability to mark modality and tense is furthermore a strong factor favouring the use of

that-clauses. It has already been noted that adjectives denote modality. The additional

marking of modality on the finite verb in a that-clause can thus be seen as enforcing or

qualifying the modality already denoted by the adjectival matrix predicate. This fact might

help to explain why, as seen in Table 21, there are 16 examples of possible complemented by

extraposed that-clauses and only one example of impossible complemented in the same way.

Although possible and impossible have been classified as belonging to the same semantic

categories and thus denoting the same modality, there is a difference in the scope of this

modality between the two predicates. Consequently, if something is possible, it can be

possible to a varying degree, whereas when something is impossible, it is usually considered

to be less open to varying degrees of impossibility. In other words, intuitively, the modality

denoted by possible is far more likely than the modality denoted by impossible to be enforced

or qualified by an additional modal marking on the finite verb in a that-clause. In fact, 14 of

the 16 examples of possible, complemented by extraposed that-clauses are marked for

modality on the finite verb in the that-clause. As seen in (79), replacing possible with

impossible when qualified by the modal may causes, if not ungrammaticality, at least

problems processing the sentence since it seems unlikely that something that is impossible

‘may still bind something together.’


44

(79) This surprising observation has implications for the application of d 3C A to the study of DNA-protein interactions since it is possible that DNA duplexes

containing this analogue may bind proteins in the minor groove and

therefore, the results from such studies need to be interpreted with care. (BNC K5S 55) (cf. ?it is impossible that DNA duplexes containing this analogue may bind

proteins in the minor groove)

The fact that the modal may is responsible for causing the marginal acceptability in (79) with

impossible is further illustrated in (80) as the sentence makes much more sense when may is

removed and the verb bind is in the indicative.

(80) it is impossible that DNA duplexes containing this analogue bind proteins in

the minor groove

As seen, neither the semantic classification, nor the valency possibilities can account for the

differences in distribution between certain adjectives as there is nothing to suggest that

impossible does not have the ability to be complemented by that-clauses, with or without a

qualifying modal, it is just less likely to do so than possible.

3.3 The Post-Predicative Parallelism

The parallelism between post-predicative that- and to-clauses is subject to one important

constraint: the subject in the matrix clause has to be co-referential with the subject in the that-

clause in order to transform a post-predicative that-clause into a subjectless post-predicative

to-clause, as illustrated in (81).

(81) Victor: I'm glad I'm normal. (BNC ARD 408) (cf. I’m glad to be normal) As a consequence, this parallelism is not possible when the matrix subject is not co-referential

with the subject in the that-clause. As seen in (82), if the subject in the that-clause is not co-

referential with the matrix subject, a corresponding subjectless post-predicative to-clause

cannot be formed.

(82) I'm sorry he missed his Blue but Oxford was very strong in those

years… (BNC HR4 2469) (cf. *I’m sorry to miss his Blue)

Note that the corresponding to-clause in (82) is not ungrammatical as such but the fact that the

subject in the that-clause, he, cannot be conveyed in a subjectless post-predicative to-clause

alters the intended meaning. As noted in section 3.2, the concept of ‘control’ stipulates that


45

there is a referential link between the matrix subject and the absent subject of a to-clause

(Postal 1970: 443). This explains why the matrix subject of a post-predicative that-clause has

to be co-referential with the subject of the that-clause in order to form a corresponding

subjectless post-predicative to-clause, as in (81).14

Table 22 shows the adjectival predicates that are attested as complemented by both post-

predicative that- and to-clauses. In fact, only about 25% of post-predicative that-clauses in

Table 22 have co-referential subjects. As a consequence, the remaining 75% of post-

predicative that-clauses do not allow a corresponding subjectless post-predicative to-clause.

Table 22. Distribution of post-predicative clauses. Clause


afraid 5 23 28

anxious 16 1 17

certain 8 12 20

concerned 4 5 9

glad 6 20 26

happy 22 1 23

lucky 5 4 9

pleased 7 3 10

proud 1 2 3

right 2 3 5

sorry 8 10 18

sure 1 105 106

surprised 9 5 14

Total 85 77 162

As noted in section 3.1, post-predicative to-clauses with for-subjects are rare as there are

only three examples of them in the subcorpus. None of them occur with an adjectival

predicate that is attested as complemented by both that- and to-clauses. In theory, however,

for-subjects can serve as a means of transforming a post-predicative that-clause, that does not

have co-referential subjects, into a corresponding to-clause. For example, consider the

predicate content in (83), one of the three examples of post-predicative to-clauses with for-

subjects.

14 The concept of control is distinguished from the concept of raising. In other words, according to Hornstein (1999: 69), control is a deletion process whereas raising is a movement process. This means that the distinction drawn in the present study between the grammatical patterns of co-referential subjects and subject-to-subject rasing is considered to be a distinction related to movement only. As a consequence this also means that even thogh there is a referential relationship between the matrix subject and the absent subject of a to-clause, i.e. control (a deletion process), this does not extend to the potentiality of all structures with referential relationships being considered to belong to the grammatical pattern of co-referential subjects. See also the distinction drawn in section 2.1.1 between the grammatical patterns of subject-to-subject raising and co-referential subjects.


46

(83) The only objective sense in which monetarism worked better than Keynesianism was the electoral one: the "strong bargainers in all classes" were content for the

economy to run at well below capacity. (BNC A6G 1364) (cf. the “strong bargainers in all classes” were content that the economy would

run at well below capacity)

Similarly in (82), repeated below as (84), a for-subject can be introduced in the corresponding

to-clause in order to account for the fact that the subject in the that-clause is not co-referential

with the subject in the matrix clause.

(84) I'm sorry he missed his Blue but Oxford was very strong in those

years… (BNC HR4 2469) (cf. I’m sorry for him to miss his Blue)

The fact that for-subjects very seldom are used with post-predicative to-clauses clearly shows

that that-clauses are very much preferred when the subject of the complement clause is not

co-referential with the subject of the matrix clause. The explanation for this distribution

would then be that, in the unmarked form, that-clauses are predominantly used when the

subject of the that-clause is not co-referential with the matrix subject (75%) and to-clauses are

used when the subjects are co-referential. Conversely, in the marked form, that-clauses are

sometimes used when the subject of the that-clause is co-referential with the subject of the

matrix clause (25%) whereas to-clauses with for-subjects very rarely are used to introduce a

subject in post-predicative to-clauses.

The predominance of using to-clauses when the subjects are co-referential also illustrate an

important point about redundancy that ties in with the concept of ‘control.’ When the matrix

subject is co-referential with the subject of the to-clause, the insertion of a for-subject causes

redundancy since there is already a referential link between the matrix subject and the absent

subject of the to-clause. In other words, in these instances, the pressure to use a post-

predicative that-clause or a post-predicative to-clause with for-subject is virtually non-existent

since the referential link is already established.

3.4 The Extraposed/Post-Predicative Parallelism

The extraposed/post-predicative parallelism includes two different parallelisms. First, it

accounts for subject-to-subject raising, as discussed in section 2.1.1, i.e. the parallelism

between an extraposed that-clause and a post-predicative to-clause (it is certain that he...and

he is certain to...). Secondly, it also accounts for object-to-subject raising, as discussed in

section 2.1.3, i.e. the parallelism between an extraposed to-clause and a post-predicative to-


47

clause (it is impossible to see her and she is impossible to see). Accordingly, these two

parallelisms are differentiated by the fact the one is clause type external, i.e. includes a shift

from one clause type to the other (subject-to-subject raising). The second parallelism,

however, is clause type internal as it only includes a shift between two different constructions

of to-clauses (object-to-subject raising).

3.4.1 Subject-Raising

As seen in section 2.1.1, adjectives that conform to the grammatical pattern of subject-to-

subject-raising allow complementation by both a post-predicative to-clause and an extraposed

that-clause. In contrast to the parallelisms discussed in section 3.2 and 3.3, the parallelism

between extraposed that-clauses and post-predicative to-clauses does not require the insertion

of non-referring subjects in the that-clause since an inherent property of the subject-to-

subject-raising adjectives is that they allow movement of the matrix subject from a post-

predicative to-clause to the subject position in a corresponding extraposed that-clause, or vice

versa, as illustrated in (85) (i.e. the G7 meeting is certain to... and it is certain that the G7

meeting...).

(85) Officials see little need for early "crisis" talks on the situation in Japan but

believe that the G7 meeting on April 26 is almost certain to focus on the

Japanese situation, with the International Monetary Fund expected to set

the scene with new forecasts for the global economy. (BNC AJP 38) (cf. it is almost certain that the G7 meeting on April 26 will focus on the

Japanese situation) The fact that the extraposed that-clause in (85) does not require the insertion of a non-

referring subject in the that-clause shows that the post-predicative/extraposed parallelism with

subject-raising adjectives is stronger than both the extraposed parallelism, discussed in section

3.2, and the post-predicative parallelism, discussed in section 3.3. Accordingly, the post-

predicative to-clause and the corresponding extraposed that-clause in (85) are treated as two

different stylistic options.

Not all adjectives that are attested in the subcorpus as complemented by both a post-

predicative to-clause and an extraposed that-clause allow the parallelism in (85). As seen in

Table 23, many of the adjectives that are attested in the subcorpus with this type of

complementation are not subject-raising adjectives.


48

Table 23. Distribution of adjectives complemented by both post-predicative to-clauses and extraposed that-clauses. Clause Construction


Post-pr. Extrap.

certain 8 2 10

essential 1 3 4

good 2 5 7

important 1 10 11

impossible 10 1 11

likely 123 27 150

necessary 11 2 13

right 2 4 6

unlikely 15 15 30

Total 173 69 242

As illustrated in (86), and as discussed in section 2.1.2, predicates that belong to the

grammatical pattern of co-referential subjects do not allow the parallelism illustrated in (85).

(86) Now it is important that you find out about your blood pressure, because

again erm if that is, is rising it's putting your (BNC G4G 324) (cf. *You are important to find out about your blood pressure) As a consequence, there are only four predicates attested in the subcorpus that allow the

parallelism illustrated in (85), namely certain, likely, right and unlikely (see sections 2.1.1 and

2.1.4). Other subject-raising predicates such as sure and lucky are not discussed here since

they are not attested as complemented by both a post-predicative to-clause and an extraposed

that-clause. The revised version of Table 4, including only those predicates that allow subject-

to-subject raising is given in Table 24.

Table 24. Distribution of subject-raising predicates. Clause Construction


Post-pr. Extrap.

certain 8 2 10

likely 123 27 150

right 2 4 6

unlikely 15 15 30

Total 148 48 196

As seen in Table 24, largely due to the influence of the predicate likely, post-predicative to-

clauses (148/196, about 75%) are far more frequent than extraposed that-clauses (48/196,

about 25%). The following discussion will try to account for the factors that influence the

choice between these two stylistic options.


49

It has been noted in previous sections that an important factor that favours the use of that-

clauses is the fact that modality and tense can be marked on the finite verb. It has similarly

been noted that adjectives denote modality and that the additional marking of modality on the

finite verb enforces or qualifies the modality already denoted by the adjectival matrix

predicate. This enforcing or qualificational property can also be applied to the marking of

tense. The modal will, used to mark future time, serves as a good example. Consider (87),

adopted from Biber et al. (1999: 734) who claims that a that-clause has to be used in (87)

since modality and tense cannot be marked in to-clauses.

(87) It is likely that wheelchairs will be excluded from future London Marathons (88) Wheelchairs are likely to be excluded from future London Marathons As a consequence, according to Biber et al., the futurity of (87) is dependent on the explicit

marking of future time by the modal will. As seen by the corresponding post-predicative to-

clause in (88), this is clearly not true. Although, futurity is not explicitly marked, there is

nothing in (88) that suggests that the sentence does not refer to future time. In fact, Mair

(1992: 100) notes that likely is predominantly used in future-oriented predictions (see also

Stowell 1982: 562 about the futurity of infinitives). This fact taken together with the fact that

the PP in (87) includes the adjective future, provide no difficulty in interpreting (88) as

referring to future time. As seen in (89), the removal of the future marker will does not force

an interpretation of (89) as not referring to future time.

(89) It is likely that wheelchairs are excluded from future London Marathons If, however, will is replaced by might, as in (90), the modality expressed by might qualifies

the modality expressed by likely with the meaning ‘there might be a possibility that it is likely

that wheelchairs are excluded from future London Marathons’ (see Quirk et al. 1985: 223).

(90) It is likely that wheelchairs might be excluded from future London

Marathons

In other words, the qualification of the modality by might in (90) cannot be conveyed in a to-

clause. Accordingly, the marking of future time, at least with the predicate likely is not

dependent on a future marking on the finite verb in the that-clause whereas modality

distinctions, as in (90), are.


50

There are several examples of likely complemented by an extraposed that-clause with will

as the finite verb in the subcorpus, as in (91), but that does not necessarily mean that a to-

clause cannot be used in these circumstances.

(91) It is likely that the Government will fully fund the required expansion in

overall student numbers. (BNC A27 386) (cf. The Government is likely to fully fund the overall expansion in overall

student numbers)

In fact, as seen in Table 24, with the adjectives that allow subject-to-subject raising, post-

predicative to-clauses, i.e. subject-raising, are much more frequent than extraposed that-

clauses, especially with the predicate likely (123/150, or 82%, with likely).

Register variation also proves to be a factor that influences the choice between post-

predicative to-clauses and extraposed that-clauses. Biber et al. (1999: 732) report that the

subject raising predicates likely and unlikely are rarely complemented by extraposed that-

clauses in academic prose and news. Table 25 shows the register distribution of the subject-

raising predicates across clause type and construction. Although the low number of examples

makes it hard to draw any definitive conclusions, the register distribution in Table 25 can be

seen as a general guideline. As seen, likely and unlikely are rarely complemented by

extraposed that-clauses in the press register, 12% and 20% respectively.

Table 25. Register distribution of subject-raising predicates.

Adjective Clause Construction

certain likely right unlikely

to that to that to that to that

Register Post-pr. Extrap. Post-pr. Extrap. Post-pr. Extrap. Post-pr. Extrap.

Academic - - - - 69 83% 14 17% 1 100% - - 3 27% 8 73%

Fiction - - 1 100% 2 40% 3 60% - - - 2 50% 2 50%

Press 8 89% 1 11% 42 88% 6 12% - - - 8 80% 2 20%

Spoken - - - - 10 71% 4 29% 1 20% 4 80% 2 40% 3 60%

However, unlike the register distribution reported in Biber et al. (1999: 732), in the academic

register, unlikely is in fact more commonly complemented by extraposed that-clauses (73%)

than by post-predicative to-clauses (27%). The low number of examples of unlikely makes it

hard to draw any definitive conclusions about its register distribution. The predominance of

likely complemented by post-predicative to-clauses rather than by extraposed that-clauses in

the academic register can partially be explained by individual authors’ preference for post-

predicative to-clauses. Out of the total of 69 instances of likely complemented by post-

predicative to-clauses in the academic register, 30 examples are from two different texts


51

which both show a dense use of likely complemented by post-predicative to-clauses, as

illustrated in (92) and (93).15 Biber et al. (1999: 731) similarly note that choices relating to

complementation are very often subject to individual preference.

(92) Sun/Star readers were more likely than others to have no preference at all in

1986 (despite voting in 1987), and at the same time, those Sun/Star readers who did have a preference in 1986 were more likely than others to change it during

the next year (Table 8.16). (BNC A62 749) (93) However, that reflected the fact that readers of highbrow papers were more

likely to place their faith in the press, and they were the least likely to change

their voting intentions. Amongst readers of the same paper (or paper-group as defined in Table 8.17) those who said they relied more on the press than on television were more likely to swing in the direction of their paper's

partisanship. (BNC A62 769-770) The examples in (92) and (93) also show that these post-predicative to-clauses can have very

complex matrix subjects in the academic register (e.g. those Sun/Star readers who did have a

preference in 1986 and those who said they relied more on the press than on television).

Complex matrix subjects is a feature that is associated with the academic register. In fiction

and the spoken register, the matrix subjects are typically anaphoric pronouns referring back to

something already introduced in the preceding discourse, as in (94) from fiction and as in (95)

from the spoken register.

(94) “She hasn’t run away” said Maud. “She wouldn’t have gone just because H.B.

told her off. Anyway, she's not likely to have run away without old Tabby

here, especially as that was why H.B. was cross in the first place. (BNC CCA 418-420)

(95) Making a will with a solicitor also has the advantage of that you'll have a copy,

he's likely to look after it for you if you want him to. (BNC FMS 552) As seen in both (94) and (95), the pronominal matrix subjects, she and he, are anaphorically

referring back to something already mentioned in the preceding discourse (she and a

solicitor). Consequently, it is unusual for subject raising adjectives to be complemented by

post-predicative to-clauses with complex matrix subjects in fiction and the spoken register.

Instead, complex matrix subjects are most common in the academic register.

15 As noted in section 1.5, text-files in the BNC do not necessarily consist of one single text but the 30 examples from these two text-files have been manually checked and they do all constitute examples from two different texts rather than just two different text-files.


52

3.4.2 Object-Raising

The adjectives that allow object-to-subject raising allow the object of an extraposed to-clause

to become the subject of a corresponding post-predicative to-clause (e.g. it is impossible to

meet him/he is impossible to meet). This parallelism is differentiated from the

extraposed/post-predicative parallelism discussed in section 3.4.1 as it is clause type internal,

i.e. includes two stylistic options that is related to to-clauses only. There are very few object-

raising adjectives included in the study. The reason for this is that typical object-raising

adjectives such as tough, hard and easy do not allow complementation by that-clauses and are

not included in the present study. However, the few object-raising adjectives that are attested

as complemented by both extraposed and post-predicative to-clauses merit a short discussion.

Table 26 shows that there are only two adjectives that are attested with this parallelism (see

section 2.1.4 for the object-raising adjectives that are included in this study but not attested as

complemented by both an extraposed and post-predicative to-clause).

Table 26. Distribution of object-raising adjectives Clause Construction

to Total

Adjective Extraposed Post-Predicative

good 42 2 44

impossible 25 10 35

Total 67 12 79

Furthermore, Table 26 shows that extraposed to-clauses, by far, outnumber the post-

predicative clauses. Due to the low frequency of this parallelism, the frequency distribution of

these two adjectives will not be discussed further. Instead the following discussion will try to

identify different factors that influence the choice between the two constructions.

There are different grammatical factors that favours the use of the two different

constructions. Biber et al. (1999: 728) note that extraposed clauses, i.e. non-raised

constructions, are typically used when the object of the to-clause is a complex structure

consisting of another complement clause or a noun phrase with complex modifiers. This

observation squares well with what is found in the subcorpus. As seen in (96), an extreme

example of the point made by Biber et al., the object of the extraposed to-clause is a very

complex structure.


53

(96) A favourite composer of Beecham's was Berlioz, so it's good to have back in

circulation his famous 1957 performance of the Symphonie Fantastique

with the French National Radio Orchestra (CDM7 64032 2) coupled with

the overtures King Lear, made with the RPO, and the pre-War and still

vivid Carnival Romain with the LPO. (BNC AJV 404) The reason why an extraposed to-clause i preferred in (96) is illustrated in the corresponding

post-predicative construction in (97), i.e. the raised construction, which requires the complex

object in (96) as subject of the matrix clause in (97).

(97) A favourite composer of Beecham's was Berlioz, so his famous 1957

performance of the Symphonie Fantastique with the French National Radio Orchestra (CDM7 64032 2) coupled with the overtures King Lear, made with the RPO, and the pre-War and still vivid Carnival Romain with the LPO is good to have back in circulation.

Apart from the difficulty of identifying the clause boundaries in (97), there is another obvious

explanation why (96) is preferred rather than (97). According to the principles of end-focus

and end-weight (see Quirk et al. 1985: 1361.1364), extraposition serves as a mean of placing

a complex constituent after the predicate, i.e. after good in (96), in order to present new

information at the end of the sentence rather than as the subject of the matrix clause, as in

(97).

Following the principles of end-focus and end-weight, post-predicative to-clauses, i.e.

raised constructions, are, on the other hand, typically represented by having a non-complex

matrix subject such as a pronoun or a non-complex noun phrase. The example in (98) serves

as a particularly good example:

(98) I would not take office under MacDonald, and yet it [i.e. to take office under

MacDonald] would have been impossible to have refused. (BNC A6G 205) The matrix subject in (98), it, is clearly not an example of anticipatory it as it refers to ‘take

office under MacDonald.’ Furthermore, since the matrix subject refers to something that has

already been introduced it is clearly not new information. Since the information referred to by

it in (98) is already given, there is no pressure to use an extraposed clause since it would cause

redundancy, as seen in (99).

(99) I would not take office under MacDonald, and yet it would have been

impossible to have refused to take office under MacDonald.


54

In other words, in order to transform (98) into an extraposed clause in which the matrix

subject it is non-referring, i.e. functioning as anticipatory it, the reference conveyed by it in

(98), i.e. ‘to take office under MacDonald’, has to be repeated as the object of the to-clause in

(99). The differences between complex and non-complex matrix subjects and complex and

non-complex objects in the complement clause will be further discussed in section 3.5.

3.5 Register Variation and the Function of Extraposed and Post-Predicative Clauses

In section 3.4.2, the concepts of end-focus and end-weight were discussed in connection with

extraposed to-clauses. Extraposed to-clauses also serve the function of “presenting a stance

that is not directly attributed to anyone” (Biber et al. 1999: 723) and are therefore frequently

used in the academic register. In contrast, Biber et al. (1999: 723) describe the function of

post-predicative to-clauses as conveying a stance that can be attributed to someone or

something, a function which is particularly suited for the press register. Furthermore, due to

these two functions and their associations with the academic and the press register, Biber et al.

(1999: 722) note that to-clauses in general are more common in written informational

registers than in fiction or speech. Again, these observations by Biber et al. square well with

what is found in the subcorpus. Table 27 shows the register distribution across clause type and

construction.

Table 27. Register variation across clause type and construction.

Register

Clause Constr. Academic Fiction Press Spoken Total

to Extrap. 121 36% 32 17% 56 23% 55 30% 264 28%

Post-pr. 106 32% 42 23% 109 45% 36 19% 293 31%

to Total 227 68% 74 40% 165 68% 91 49% 557 59%

that Extrap. 94 28% 17 9% 47 20% 33 18% 191 20%

Post-pr. 13 4% 92 51% 29 12% 61 33% 195 21%

that Total 107 32% 109 60% 76 32% 94 51% 386 41%

Total 334 100% 183 100% 241 100% 185 100% 943 100%

As shown in Table 27, to-clauses are frequent in the academic and press registers as they

represent 68% of all instances in both registers. Fiction and the spoken register, on the other

hand, are represented by fewer to-clauses (40% and 49% respectively). Although both the

academic and the press register have the same percentages of to-clauses, there is variation in

the distribution of extraposed and post-predicative to-clauses between the two registers.

Extraposed to-clauses (36%) are slightly more frequent than post-predicative to-clauses (32%)

in the academic register. In contrast, post-predicative to-clauses (45%) are more frequent than


55

extraposed to-clauses (23%) in the press register. In other words, the press register is, due to

the high frequency of post-predicative to-clauses, characterised as presenting a stance that is

attributed to someone, usually conveyed with a proper name as subject of the matrix clause, as

illustrated in (100) with Mr Shamir as matrix subject.

(100) It appears Mr Shamir, as with his original peace initiative, is keen to get the

Americans off his back by showing willing. (BNC A2X 116) (101) It is possible to make such objects invisible to readers if they are irrelevant

to the hypertext side. (BNC CG8 139) The academic register, on the other hand, is, due to the high frequency of extraposed to-

clauses, characterised as expressing a stance that is not directly attributed to someone, as seen

in (101).

Interestingly, a similar distribution is found in fiction and the spoken register. Extraposed

to-clauses (30%) are more frequent than post-predicative to-clauses (19%) in the spoken

register whereas post-predicative to-clauses (23%) are more frequent than extraposed to-

clauses (17%) in fiction. Furthermore, as seen in Table 27, post-predicative that-clauses are

also very frequent in both fiction and the spoken register (51% and 33% respectively). In the

case of fiction, the high frequency of both post-predicative to- and that-clause can be

explained by the predominant use of personal pronouns as matrix subjects. In his dimensions

of register variation, Biber (1995: 152) includes a high use of third person pronouns as one of

the positive features of ‘narrative discourse.’ Another feature associated with ‘narrative

discourse’ is the use of past tense verbs (Biber 1995: 152). A closer examination of the post-

predicative clauses in the fiction register shows that the majority of instances in fact includes

a third person pronoun as matrix subject and a verb in the past tense, as in the post-predicative

to-clause in (102) and the post-predicative that-clause in (103), both examples from fiction.

(102) She was glad to see the back of them with their interfering ways and their

lack of respect. (BNC A73 1037) (103) She wasn't sure she wanted to return, but seemed not to have much choice

anymore, and so she stayed. (BNC A0U 2275) The register distribution of that-clauses also reflects the differing functions of extraposed and

post-predicative that-clauses. As seen in Table 27, the academic and press register show a

higher frequency of extraposed (28% and 20% respectively) rather than post-predicative that-

clauses (4% and 12% respectively). On the contrary, both fiction and the spoken register have


56

a higher frequency of post-predicative that-clauses (51% and 33% respectively) compared to

the frequency of extraposed clauses (9% and 18% respectively). The high frequency of post-

predicative that-clauses in fiction and the spoken register reflects the interpersonal nature of

both these registers. Biber (1995: 142), in his dimensions of register variation, shows that the

omission of the complementizer that is a feature of ‘involved production,’ i.e. interpersonal

rather than informational production. An examination of the data included in this study shows

that omission of that is most frequent in fiction and the spoken register (see Biber et al. 1999:

680-682, Bolinger 1962, Thompson & Mulac 1991 and Kaltenböck 2006 for other aspects

favouring the omission of that). Another feature that is identified by Biber (1995: 142) as

characteristic of ‘involved production’ is a high frequency of first person pronouns. The

spoken register, in fact, shows a high frequency of post-predicative that-clauses with first

person pronouns as matrix subjects. The typical use of post-predicative that-clauses in the

spoken register thus includes omission of that and a first person pronoun as matrix subject, as

illustrated in (104).

(104) I'm glad I'm Moderator now and no longer a convenor. (BNC F85 77) As was shown in section 2.2, post-predicative that-clauses in the spoken register are also most

frequently complementing evaluative predicates, such as glad in (104).

Extraposed that-clauses have more or less the same function as extraposed to-clauses. This

explains the fact that extraposed that-clauses are most frequently used in the academic register

since they have the function of expressing a stance that is not directly attributed to anyone.

Extraposed that-clauses in the academic and the press register, more often than in fiction and

the spoken register, have a complex subject in the that-clause, as illustrated in (105) from the

academic register and (106) from the press register.

(105) It was clear that the dominant element in his government, that is, the

Conservatives, were determined upon an election. (BNC A6G 318) (106) I believe it to have been factually true that Crossman's ambition to gain and

retain Cabinet office was the aspiration to be in a position to observe what

goes on as an academic or a philosopher observes. (BNC A27 23) Furthermore, the tendency to have complex subjects in extraposed that-clauses in the

academic and the press register is strongest with epistemic predicates such as clear and true in

(105) and (106). As was shown in section 2.2, epistemic predicates are also most frequent in

the academic and the press register.


57

It is thus possible to conclude that at the one extreme we find the academic register, most

frequently represented by extraposed to-clauses complementing epistemic predicates. At the

other extreme we find the spoken register, most frequently represented by post-predicative

that-clauses with that omission complementing evaluative predicates. Furthermore, these two

complementation patterns and the modality associated with them reflect the differing

functions these types of complement patterns have in the academic and the spoken register

respectively.

4. Concluding Remarks

The empirical part of this study spans over two major sections. The first of these two sections,

section 2, has attempted to answer the question whether there is a correlation between the

semantics of different adjectives, the grammatical pattern they allow and their differing

valency possibilities. In the attempt to investigate whether such a correlation exists, a

semantic categorisation of the 40 adjectives included in this study has been conducted. The

distribution of semantic categories across the two clause types has revealed that adjectives

that allow complementation by both that- and to-clauses most frequently express epistemic

modality (see Table 7, section 2.1). Furthermore, it has been demonstrated that epistemic

predicates typically allow subject-to-subject raising and belong to the impersonal/personal

valency pattern. Predicates expressing deontic modality, on the other hand, typically have co-

referential subjects and belong to the impersonal/personal valency pattern. Predicates

expressing dynamic modality are less homogeneous than epistemic and deontic predicates.

The archetypical structural properties of dynamic predicates expressing human attribute

include co-referential subjects as well as they belong to the personal valency pattern.

However, the dynamic predicate impossible, expressing potentiality, are differentiated from

the other dynamic predicates as it allows object-to-subject raising. The predicates expressing

evaluation form two different groups. First, the evaluative predicates expressing emotive

reaction typically have co-referential subjects and belong to the personal valency pattern. The

evaluative predicates expressing appropriateness and general evaluation, on the other hand,

either allow subject-to-subject raising or object-to-subject raising and belong to the

impersonal/personal valency pattern. Furthermore, the study has shown that epistemic

predicates are most frequent in the academic and the press register whereas evaluative

predicates are most frequent in fiction the spoken register.


58

The second empirical part of this study, section 3, has discussed different factors that

influence the choice between that- and to-clauses. It has been shown that extraposed to-

clauses with for-subjects are relatively rare as they only account for about 10% of the total

number of extraposed to-clauses. Furthermore, there are also relatively few examples of post-

predicative that-clauses with co-referential subjects (about 25%), a prerequisite in order to

transform a post-predicative that-clause into a corresponding subjectless to-clause. These two

facts taken together suggest that one of the most important factors influencing the choice

between that- and to-clauses is the presence/absence of a subject in the complement clause. In

other words, to-clauses are predominantly used when there is no need to explicitly mark the

subject of the to-clause (as the low frequency of for-subjects shows). That-clauses, on the

other hand, are predominantly used when the subject of the complement clause is not co-

referential with the matrix subject and is therefore non-redundant (as the comparatively low

frequency of post-predicative that-clauses with co-referential subjects shows). Other

important factors influencing the choice between that- and to-clauses include the possibility to

mark tense and modality on the finite verb in that-clauses. The study shows that the ability to

mark modality on the finite verb in that-clauses constitutes an important factor favouring the

use of that-clauses.

Furthermore, register variation interplays with grammatical features in the choice between

extraposed that-clauses and post-predicative to-clauses with adjectives allowing subject-to-

subject raising. Different subject-raising adjectives have a different register distribution of

extraposed that-clauses and post-predicative to-clauses although likely and unlikely are the

only two moderately frequent adjectives attested as complemented by these two types of

constructions. More interestingly, however, the study shows that post-predicative to-clauses

in the academic register quite frequently have complex matrix subjects whereas post-

predicative to-clauses in fiction and the spoken register typically have matrix subjects that are

anaphoric pronouns, referring back to something mentioned in the preceding discourse.

Finally, the study shows that the register distribution of that- and to-clauses reflects the

differing functions of the two clause types and their two constructional variants. Extraposed

to-clauses are more frequent than post-predicative to-clauses in the academic register as

extraposed to-clauses have the function of expressing a stance that is not directly attributed to

someone. Conversely, post-predicative to-clauses are more frequent than extraposed to-

clauses in the press register since they serve the function of conveying a stance that is

attributed to someone. Furthermore, the study has shown that both post-predicative that- and

to-clauses are frequent in fiction, typically with a third person personal pronoun as matrix


59

subject and with a matrix verb phrase in the past tense, two features that are common in

narrative discourse.

Although this study provides a comprehensive account of adjectives allowing

complementation by both that- and to-clauses, it is not fully exhaustive. In order to give a full

account of the functions of that- and to-clauses, a larger selection of adjectives is needed. The

scope of the present study has furthermore prevented the analysis of parallelisms between

other types of complement clauses, such as -ing participial clauses and wh-clauses. Other

interesting avenues of research include statistical analyses of the likelihood of certain

adjectives being complemented by different clause types and constructions. Statistical

analyses of register variation would also have the potential of creating detailed statistical

prototypes for different registers, i.e. constructional and grammatical features associated with

different registers.


60

Bibliography

Allerton, D. J. 1982. Valency and the English Verb. London: Academic Press. Aston, G. & L. Burnard. 1998. The BNC Handbook: Exploring the British National Corpus with

SARA. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Behre, F. 1955. Meditative-Polemic SHOULD in Modern English THAT-clauses. Gothenburg: Acta

Universitatis Gothoburgensis. Biber, D. 1993. ‘Representativeness in Corpus Design.’ Literary and Linguistic Computing 8: 243-

257. Biber, D. 1995. Dimensions of Register Variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Biber, D. 1999. 'A Register Perspective on Grammar and Discourse: Variability in the Form and Use

of English Complement Clauses.' Discourse Studies 1: 131-150. Biber, D., S. Conrad. & G. Leech. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English.

Harlow: Longman. Bolinger, D.L. 1972. That's that. The Hague: Mouton. Bresnan, J. 2001. Lexical-Functional Syntax. Oxford: Blackwell. Burnard, L. 2008. Reference Guide for BNC Baby. URL:

http://www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk/corpus/baby/manual.pdf Collins, P. 1994. ‘Extraposition in English.’ Functions of Language 1: 7-24. Cowan, R. 2008. The Teacher’s Grammar of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Davies, M. 2009. 'The 385+ Million Word Corpus of Contemporary American English (1990-

2008+): Design, Architecture, and Linguistic Insights.' International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 14: 159–190.

Dixon, R.M.W. 2005. A Semantic Approach to English Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Elsness, J. 1984. 'That or Zero? A Look at the Choice of Object Clause Connective in a Corpus of

American English.' English Studies 65: 519-533. Finegan, E. & Biber, D. 1995. 'That and Zero Complementisers in Late Modern English: Exploring

ARCHER from 1650-1990.' In Aarts, B. & C.F. Meyer (eds.) The Verb in Contemporary

English: Theory and Description: 241-257. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Garside, R. 1987. ‘The CLAWS Word-Tagging System.’ In Garside, Leech & Sampson (eds.) The

Computational Analysis of English: A Corpus-Based Approach: 30-41. London: Longman. Givón, T. 1980. ‘The Binding Hierarchy and the Typology of Complements.’ Studies in Language

4: 333-377.


61

Greenbaum, S., G. Nelson. & M. Weitzman. 1996. ‘Complement Clauses in English.’ In Thomas &

Short (eds.) Using Corpora for Language Research: Studies in the Honour of Geoffrey Leech: 76-92. London: Longman.

Herbst, T. 1983. Untersuchungen zur Valenz englischer Adjective und ihrer Nominalisierungen.

Tübingen: Narr. Herbst, T. 1988. A Valency Model for Nouns in English. Journal of Linguistics 24: 265-301. Herbst, T., D. Heath., I.F. Roe. & D. Götz. 2004. A Valency Dictionary of English: A Corpus-Based

Analysis of the Complementation Patterns of English Verbs, Nouns and Adjectives. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Hermerén, L. 1986. ‘Modalities in Spoken and Written English. An Inventory of Forms.’ In Tottie &

Bäcklund (eds.) English in Speech and Writing: 57-91. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International.

Herriman, J. 2000. ‘Extraposition in English: A Study of the Interaction Between the Matrix

Predicate and the Type of Extraposed Clause.’ English Studies 6: 582-599. Hoffman, S., Y. Berglund., D. Lee. & N. Smith. 2002. The BNCweb Manual. URL:

http://homepage.mac.com/bncweb/manual/bncwebman-home.htm Hornstein, N. 1999. ‘Movement and Control.’ Linguistic Inquiry 30: 69-96. Householder Jr, F.W., D. Alexander. & P.H. Matthews. 1964. Adjectives Before THAT-clauses in

English. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club. Huddleston, R. 1971. The Sentence in Written English: A Syntactic Study Based on an Analysis of

Scientific Texts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Huddleston, R. & G.K. Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hudson, R.A. 1971. English Complex Sentences: An Introduction to Systemic Grammar.

Amsterdam: North-Holland. Hundt, M., A. Sand. & R. Siemund. 1998. Manual of Information to Accompany the Freiburg-LOB

Corpus of British English (FLOB). URL: http://khnt.hit.uib.no/icame/manuals/flob/INDEX.htm

Hundt, M., A. Sand. & P. Skandera. 1999. Manual of Information to Accompany the Freiburg-

Brown Corpus of American English (Frown). URL: http://khnt.hit.uib.no/icame/manuals/frown/INDEX.htm

Hunston, S. & J. Sinclair. 2000. ‘A Local Grammar of Evaluation’. In Hunston & Thompson (eds.)

Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse: 74-101. Oxford: Oxford University Press.


62

Hunston, S. 2008. ‘Corpus Compilation and Corpus Types: Collection Strategies and Design Decisions.’ In Lüdeling & Kytö (eds.) Corpus Linguistics: An International Handbook Vol. I: 154-168. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

Johansson, S., G. Leech. & H. Goodluck. 1978. Manual of Information to Accompany the

Lancaster-Oslo/Bergen Corpus of British English for Use with Digital Computers. Oslo: University of Oslo.

Kaltenböck, G. 2006. 'That is the Question: Complementizer Omission in Extraposed that-clauses.'

English Language and Linguistics 10: 371-396. Kearns, K. 2007. 'Regional Variation in the Distribution of Null Finite Complementizer.' Language

Variation and Change 19: 295-336. Kiparsky, P. & C. Kiparsky. 1970. ‘Fact.’ In Bierwicsh & Heidolph (eds.) Progress in Linguistics:

143-173. The Hague: Mouton. Kucěra, H. & W. Francis. 1967. Computational Analysis of Present-Day English. Providence:

Brown University Press. Lyons, J. 1977. Semantics Vol 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Mair, C. 1990. Infinitival Complement Clauses: A Study of Syntax in Discourse. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press. Mair, C. 1992. ‘Comments’ on ‘The Importance of Corpus-Linguistics to Understanding the Nature

of Language’ by W. Chafe. In Svartvik (ed.) Directions in Corpus Linguistics: Proceedings of

the Nobel symposium 82 Stockholm, 4-8 August 1991: 98-103. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Martin, J.R. & P.R.R. White. 2005. The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. New York:

Palgrave Macmillan. McEnery, T., R. Xiao. & Y. Tono. 2006. Corpus-Based Language Studies: An Advanced Resource

Book. London: Routledge.

Meyer, C.F. & G. Nelson. 2006. ‘Data Collection.’ In Aarts & McMahon (eds.) The Handbook of

English Linguistics: 93-113. Oxford: Blackwell.

Mindt, I. 2008a. 'Appropriateness in Discourse: The Adjectives surprised and surprising in Monologue and Dialogue.' Journal of Pragmatics 40: 1503-1520.

Mindt, I. 2008b. ‘Adjective Complementation by that-clauses: the Relationship Between the

Semantics of the Adjectives and the Verb Phrase in the that-clause.’ International Journal of

English Studies 19: 141-155.

Noonan, M. 1985. ‘Complementation.’ In Shopen, T. (ed.) Language Typology and Syntactic

Description vol. II: 42-140. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Palmer, F.R. 1979. Modality and the English Modals. London: Longman.


63

Perkins, M.R. 1983. Modal Expressions in English. London: Frances Pinter. Postal, P. 1970. ‘On Coreferential Complement Subject Deletion.’ Linguistic Inquiry 1: 439-500. Quirk, R., S. Greenbaum., G. Leech. & J. Svartvik. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English

Language. Harlow: Longman. Rivière, C. 1983. 'Modal Adjectives: Transformations, Synonymy and Complementation.' Lingua

59: 1-45. Rohdenburg, G. 1995. ‘On the Replacement of Finite Complement Clauses by Infinitives in

English.’ English Studies 76: 367-388. Rosenbaum, P.S. 1967. The Grammar of English Predicate Complement Constructions. Cambridge,

MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press. Scott, M. 2004. WordSmith Tools Version 4. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Stowell, T. 1982. ‘The Tense of Infinitives.’ Linguistic Inquiry 13: 561-570. Thompson, S.A. & Mulac, A. 1991. 'The Discourse Conditions for the Use of the Complementizer

that in Conversational English.' Journal of Pragmatics 15: 237-251. van Linden, A. & K. Davidse. 2009. 'The Clausal Complementation of Deontic-Evaluative

Adjectives in Extraposition Constructions: A Synchronic-Diachronic Approach.' Folia

Linguistica 43: 171-211.

Complementation of Adjectives - DiVA portal502227/FULLTEXT01.pdf · Complementation of Adjectives...

Documents

Transcript of Complementation of Adjectives - DiVA portal502227/FULLTEXT01.pdf · Complementation of Adjectives...