Could Be it’s Grammaticalization: Usage Patterns of the Epistemic Phrases(it) Could/Might Be

Abstract

Starting from the assumption that grammaticalization is rooted in situated language use, the present study tests the connection between functional reanalysis and formal reduction with a synchronic approach. It investigates a case of potential (but not actuated) grammaticalization in Present-Day English, the use of epistemic phrases of the type it could/ might be ( that), which can serve an adverbial function and undergo formal reduction in analogy to maybe. These phrases are analyzed in British English (spoken data and informal writing) for their syntactic complementation and for omission of the expletive subject it. The results show that omission rates are overall higher in “critical contexts,” that is, where the item is structurally ambiguous between a clause and an adverbial, though other usage types, such as idioms, may promote it-omission too. The findings suggest that formal reduction ( it-omission) is connected to incipient/potential grammaticalization (critical contexts) even in the absence of a diachronic grammaticalization process. Thus, they provide evidence that the oft-observed correspondence between functional and formal changes emerges immediately in synchronic language use. A possible interpretation is that certain linguistic elements have a base potential for being put to more grammatical uses; while these uses need not initiate change, speakers tend to adapt the form to its function.