Syntactic categories informing variationist analysis: The case of English copy-raising

Marisa Alana Brook


This paper re-examines variation between the comparative complementizers (AS IF, AS THOUGH, LIKE, THAT, and Ø) that follow verbs denoting ostensibility (SEEM, APPEAR, LOOK, SOUND, and FEEL) in the large city of Toronto, Canada. Given that younger speakers appear to be using more of these structures in the first place, I evaluate the hypothesis that there is a trade-off in apparent time between these finite structures and the non-finite construction of Subject-to-Subject raising. Focusing on the verb SEEM, I find that the non-finite structures are losing ground in apparent time to the finite ones. I subsequently address the issue of how best to divide up the finite tokens as co-variants opposite the finite constructions, and find that a split according to syntactic properties – whether or not the copy-raising transformation is permitted – tidily accounts for the patterning and reveals a straightforward change in progress. The results reaffirm the value of using variationist methodology to test competing claims, and also establish that variation can behave in a classic way even among whole syntactic categories.

Full Text:



Aaron, Jessi Elana. 2010. Pushing the envelope: Looking beyond the variable context. Language Variation and Change, 22 1 , 1–36.

Brook, Marisa. 2014. Comparative complementizers in Canadian English: Insights from early fiction. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 20(2). 1–10.

Gisborne, Nikolas. 2010. The event structure of perception verbs. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hopper, Paul J. & Elizabeth Closs Traugott. 2003. Grammaticalization (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Huddleston, Rodney & Geoffrey K. Pullum (eds). 2002. The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Labov, William. 2001. Principles of linguistic change, volume 2: Social factors. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

López-Couso, María José & Belén Méndez-Naya. 2012a. On the use of as if, as though, and like in present–day English complementation structures. Journal of English Linguistics 40(2). 172–195.

López-Couso, María José & Belén Méndez-Naya. 2012b. On comparative complementizers in English: Evidence from historical corpora. In Nila Vázquez (ed.), Creation and use of historical English corpora in Spain. 311–333. Newcastle–upon–Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Postal, Paul. 1974. On raising. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Potsdam, Eric & Jeffrey T. Runner. 2001. Richard returns: Copy raising and its implications. In Mary Andronis, Chris Ball, Heidi Elston & Sylvain Neuvel (eds.), CLS 37: The main session, volume 1. 453–468. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.

Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. Harlow, UK: Pearson Education.

Rogers, Andrew D. 1974. Physical perception verbs in English: A study in lexical relatedness. Los Angeles, CA: University of California dissertation.

Rooryck, Johan. 2000. Configurations of sentential complementation: Perspectives from Romance languages. London: Routledge.

Rosenbaum, Peter S. 1967. The grammar of English predicate complement constructions. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Sankoff, David, Sali A. Tagliamonte, & Eric Smith. 2010. Goldvarb X (software). Department of Linguistics, University of Toronto.

Tagliamonte, Sali A. 2003–2006. Linguistic changes in Canada entering the 21st century. Research grant, Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRCC). #410-2003-0005.

Tagliamonte, Sali A. 2006. “So cool, right?”: Canadian English entering the 21st century. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 51(2/3). 309–331.

Weinreich, Uriel, William Labov & Marvin Herzog. 1968. Empirical foundations for a theory of language change. In Winfred P. Lehmann & Yakov Malkiel (eds.), Directions for historical linguistics. 95–188. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.