Constructions Waxing and Waning: A Brief History of the Zero-Secondary Predicate Construction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the English Secondary Predicate Construction (SPC), a predicative relation between a noun phrase (NP) and a “secondary predicate” (XP) is established by a main verb ( He finds Verb her NP attractive XP ). While the syntactic nature of this construction has received ample attention from a synchronic perspective, this study aims to shed light on the diachronic developments of the SPC. First, using data from the York-Toronto-Helsinki Corpus of Old English Prose (YCOE) and the Penn corpora, a classification is proposed of the verbs occurring in the SPC. Based on this semantic classification, the development of the SPC is then traced from Old English to Late Modern English in terms of frequency and productivity. It is argued that, while the various classes of SPC-taking verbs often show opposite developments, these lower-level incongruities are resolved at a higher schematic level, as the SPC as a whole underwent a process of internalization. These findings underscore the importance of lower-level developments in the diachronic behavior of schematic constructions and consequently contribute to the literature on constructional change.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".