Diachronic patterns of usage of no doubt in the English Historical Book Collection (EEBO, ECCO and EVANS)

This study offers a collocate analysis of the modal marker no doubt (ND) in the EEBO, ECCO and EVANS combined corpora using Sketch Engine. The purpose is to determine the diachronic patterns of usage of ND, and secondly to compare results with the conclusions of existing diachronic pragmatic studies...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Smith Chris A.
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Sciendo 2018-10-01
Series:ExELL (Explorations in English Language and Linguistics)
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.2478/exell-2019-0004
id doaj-66bdd6928650497e8d9dbd7ec52bfeca
record_format Article
spelling doaj-66bdd6928650497e8d9dbd7ec52bfeca2021-09-05T21:00:53ZengSciendoExELL (Explorations in English Language and Linguistics)2303-48582018-10-016113610.2478/exell-2019-0004exell-2019-0004Diachronic patterns of usage of no doubt in the English Historical Book Collection (EEBO, ECCO and EVANS)Smith Chris A.0CRISCO EA4255, Université de Caen Normandie, FranceThis study offers a collocate analysis of the modal marker no doubt (ND) in the EEBO, ECCO and EVANS combined corpora using Sketch Engine. The purpose is to determine the diachronic patterns of usage of ND, and secondly to compare results with the conclusions of existing diachronic pragmatic studies of modal markers. The first step identified five patterns of behaviour based on AM score in decreasing order of frequency: 1 – NDB (no doubt but); 2 – TISND (there is no doubt); 3 – MND (make no doubt); 4 – (ND (parenthetical use); 5 – Ndont (no doubt on’t). The second step consisting in partitioning of the corpus following Hilpert and Gries (2016) produced 3 distinct periods based on EHBO data (1580-1669, 1670-1759, 1760-1799). The findings showed that the relative usage of ND for each period remained remarkably consistent, especially the persistence of non-grammaticalized behaviours MND and TISN. The two major disparities, concerning NDont and parenthetical (ND, were shown to be of likely significance for the changing pragmatic behaviour of ND, which further diachronic study may be able to ascertain.https://doi.org/10.2478/exell-2019-0004sketch enginecollocate analysisdiachronic corpusgrammaticalizationmodal markereeboeccoevans
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Smith Chris A.
spellingShingle Smith Chris A.
Diachronic patterns of usage of no doubt in the English Historical Book Collection (EEBO, ECCO and EVANS)
ExELL (Explorations in English Language and Linguistics)
sketch engine
collocate analysis
diachronic corpus
grammaticalization
modal marker
eebo
ecco
evans
author_facet Smith Chris A.
author_sort Smith Chris A.
title Diachronic patterns of usage of no doubt in the English Historical Book Collection (EEBO, ECCO and EVANS)
title_short Diachronic patterns of usage of no doubt in the English Historical Book Collection (EEBO, ECCO and EVANS)
title_full Diachronic patterns of usage of no doubt in the English Historical Book Collection (EEBO, ECCO and EVANS)
title_fullStr Diachronic patterns of usage of no doubt in the English Historical Book Collection (EEBO, ECCO and EVANS)
title_full_unstemmed Diachronic patterns of usage of no doubt in the English Historical Book Collection (EEBO, ECCO and EVANS)
title_sort diachronic patterns of usage of no doubt in the english historical book collection (eebo, ecco and evans)
publisher Sciendo
series ExELL (Explorations in English Language and Linguistics)
issn 2303-4858
publishDate 2018-10-01
description This study offers a collocate analysis of the modal marker no doubt (ND) in the EEBO, ECCO and EVANS combined corpora using Sketch Engine. The purpose is to determine the diachronic patterns of usage of ND, and secondly to compare results with the conclusions of existing diachronic pragmatic studies of modal markers. The first step identified five patterns of behaviour based on AM score in decreasing order of frequency: 1 – NDB (no doubt but); 2 – TISND (there is no doubt); 3 – MND (make no doubt); 4 – (ND (parenthetical use); 5 – Ndont (no doubt on’t). The second step consisting in partitioning of the corpus following Hilpert and Gries (2016) produced 3 distinct periods based on EHBO data (1580-1669, 1670-1759, 1760-1799). The findings showed that the relative usage of ND for each period remained remarkably consistent, especially the persistence of non-grammaticalized behaviours MND and TISN. The two major disparities, concerning NDont and parenthetical (ND, were shown to be of likely significance for the changing pragmatic behaviour of ND, which further diachronic study may be able to ascertain.
topic sketch engine
collocate analysis
diachronic corpus
grammaticalization
modal marker
eebo
ecco
evans
url https://doi.org/10.2478/exell-2019-0004
work_keys_str_mv AT smithchrisa diachronicpatternsofusageofnodoubtintheenglishhistoricalbookcollectioneeboeccoandevans
_version_ 1717782053723832320