25.12.2013 Views

0 INTRODUCTION

0 INTRODUCTION

0 INTRODUCTION

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

6. FINDINGS<br />

(190) (...) and thus you see the Infant grows bigger out of the Womb, by<br />

agglutinating one affllux of blood to another. (E3 1666 Harvey<br />

Morbus anglicus Academic)<br />

(191) All which, being the several Subjects of Wounds, may well be<br />

allowed to specifie them; and so much the rather, because from the<br />

nature of them we raise our greatest Indications of altering the<br />

method of Cure. (E3 1676 Wiseman Of wounds Surgery)<br />

This kind of phrase is thus strongly reminiscent of a clausal pattern in which the verb is<br />

followed by its object, as in (192a) and (192b) below:<br />

(192) a. The infant agglutinates one afflux of blood to another.<br />

b. We alter the method of cure.<br />

As already noted, this trend for –ing nominals to preferably take only post-head<br />

dependents is related to the process of increasing verbalization that these nominalizations<br />

(gerunds) were undergoing at the time (Fanego 1996: 120; see also Section 6.1.2).<br />

By contrast, Romance nominals behave quite differently (see also Table 17 above).<br />

In this case, all four types of pattern show similar frequencies in E1. Thus, the preferred<br />

pattern reaches 36%, for nominalizations having both pre- and post-head dependents, but it<br />

is not very far removed from 16.9%, which corresponds to nominalizations having only<br />

post-head dependents, the pattern with the lowest frequency. However, in E3 the situation<br />

changes dramatically. The greatest increase is shown by nominalizations having pre- and<br />

post-head dependents, which now reach 42%, as in (193) and (194) below. This increase is<br />

also noticeable for nominalizations having only pre-head dependents (26.3% vs. 22% in<br />

E1) (cf. [195] below).<br />

(193) for neither can there bee good concoction in the parts as should be,<br />

neither sufficient expulsion of the superfluities left of that<br />

concoction in the part, as should bee. (E2 1633 Holland Gutta<br />

podagrica Academic)<br />

196

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!