Great big stories and tiny little changes: tautologicalsize-adjective clusters in Present-day English

Abstract

This case study focuses on intensificatory tautological constructions (e.g. tiny littlebird, big hugepay rise). The attention that intensificatory tautology has elicited in previous literature is scarce and often centred on specific aspects of its Present-day English (PDE) distribution. Formally, tautological intensificatory patterns often involve the combination of two synonymous size-adjectives (e.g. massive great, tiny little) in a given order (i.e. great big but not big great). Functionally, they are standardly associated with emphatic descriptive modifying functions and informal styles (Matthews 2014: 364; Coffey 2013: 59; Huddleston & Pullum 2002: 561–2). This contribution takes a corpus-based, synchronic standpoint in order to (a) refine previous literature's account of the formal and functional distribution of tautological size-adjective clusters in PDE and (b) assess the significance of tautological intensification for functional–structural descriptions of the English Noun Phrase. The analyses indicate that PDE intensificatory size-adjective clusters have a wider functional distribution than has hitherto been observed, with reinforcer and adverbial intensifying functions slowly developing alongside the descriptive modifier functions. More generally, the article shows that tautological size-adjective clusters create pockets of interpersonal meanings whose impact on the formal and functional structure of the NP needs further exploration.

Intensificatory Tautology in the History of English: A Corpus-based Study

“…Small caps indicate cluster types, e.g., big huge stands for the patterns big huge and huge big . Pattern-specific distributions of reversible clusters are given in smaller font below (PDE data excepted; see González-Díaz 2018 for an analysis and discussion of cluster reversibility in PDE). Normalized figures are provided in square brackets in the tables.…”

“…Coffey (2013:64) for instance questions the “emphatic” nature of tautological intensification, whereas Matthews (2009, 2014:100) problematizes Huddleston and Pullum’s (2002) view of the stacked nature of adjective clusters, suggesting instead that both adjectives jointly modify the head noun as a single unit. More recently, González-Díaz’s (2018) exploration of the formal and functional behavior of size -clusters in Present-Day English (PDE) suggests, in line with Matthews (2014), that these tautological units are emphatic unitary constructions, semantically and syntactically akin to Benczes’ (2014) TSCs noted above. González-Díaz’s (2018) also shows that tautological size -adjective clusters in PDE have a wider semantic and functional distribution than has hitherto been acknowledged (see also section 4.4).…”

“…More recently, González-Díaz’s (2018) exploration of the formal and functional behavior of size -clusters in Present-Day English (PDE) suggests, in line with Matthews (2014), that these tautological units are emphatic unitary constructions, semantically and syntactically akin to Benczes’ (2014) TSCs noted above. González-Díaz’s (2018) also shows that tautological size -adjective clusters in PDE have a wider semantic and functional distribution than has hitherto been acknowledged (see also section 4.4).…”

“…Table 1 also suggests that the number of reversible size-cluster types increases in PDE (on the reversibility of tautological size-clusters in PDE, see González-Díaz 2018). However, this suggestion should be taken with a pinch of salt due to the noticeable differences in size between the BNC and the historical corpora used in the analysis.…”

“…Intensification in the noun phrase has traditionally been associated with prenominal slots and patterns involving collocations with degree adverbs (e.g., "very happy/really sweet boy"; see Huddleston & Pullum 2002:531-532). This is, of course, not the only available option: previous literature comments on the central role of adjectives as "the natural locus of intensification" and notes that adjectives constitute the basis of a "varied set of 1 University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK intensifying devices" that range from "standard" phrasal patterns involving adverb and adjectival sub-modifications (e.g., "stunningly beautiful," "very happy," "pure bliss," "terrible bore") to more "peripheral" options involving, among others, affixes and blends (super-special, gigantamous) or intensifying compounds (red-hot, ice-cold drink) (Cacchiani 2017:1; see also Renner 2008;Cacchiani 2010;Benczes 2014;González-Díaz 2017, 2018. As "core" intensifying strategies, degree adverbs in intensificatory phrasal patterns have received ample attention in previous literature, in terms of both their history and their distribution (e.g., Peters 1994;Lorenz 2002;Ito & Tagliamonte 2003;Méndez-Naya 2008).…”