Synthetic Intensification Devices in Old English

Even though degree adverbs (e.g., swiþe) represent the most common intensification strategy in Old English, morphological devices are also very frequent, as expected in a predominantly synthetic language. This article studies synthetic intensification strategies in Old English with a focus on degree modification of adjectives and adverbs by means of spatial formatives (e.g., þurh- in þurhbitter ‘very bitter’ and for- in foreaþe ‘very easily’), paying attention both to the features of the intensifying formative and to the characteristics of the intensified base. Using the cognitive construct of the “Image Schema,” I show that the original spatial meaning of the formatives can help explain their combinatorial preferences in terms of boundedness. Of all the items studied, for- stands out as the most grammaticalized Old English spatial intensifying formative: it is semantically opaque, is very productive with both adjectives and adverbs, and has a very wide collocational profile.

From quick to quick-to-infinitival: on what is lexeme specific across paradigmatic and syntagmatic distributions

Adjectives are paradigmatically versatile: they combine with many different items in the same syntactic configuration. They are also syntagmatically versatile: they occur in many different syntactic configurations. Given this versatility, how and to what extent can lexeme-specific preferences and features of the adjectives be identified? With the adjective quick as its starting point, this article answers this question by using corpus data, contrasting the behavior of quick with that of its semantic neighbors. Case study 1 investigates quick's attributive usage. It is shown that quick in its default usage combines with eventive heads, and that there are clear differences in combinatorial preferences across its semantic neighbors. Case study 2 investigates the quick-to-infinitival construction. Here, direct combination with eventive heads is impossible. It behaves differently from other adj-to-infinitival constructions as well as the competing quickly constructions. Comparison of the availability of this construction for quick's semantic neighbors, and linking this to the results of study 1, shows a clear connection between paradigmatic and syntagmatic distributions.