Cover not available
Article published In:
International Journal of Corpus Linguistics
Vol. 24:4 (2019) ► pp.445–489

Why very good in India might be pretty good in North America

Amplifier-adjective 2-grams in Global Englishes

| Johannes Gutenberg University

Situated at the interface of several sub-disciplines (corpus linguistics, World Englishes, variationist sociolinguistics), this study investigates patterns of adjectival amplification (very good, so glad, pretty cool) in the Corpus of Global Web-Based English (GloWbE). It highlights regional distributions/preferences of amplifier-adjective 2-grams and the idiosyncratic status of certain bigrams according to their frequency status. Globally, clear regional preferences in amplification patterns as well as possible trends concerning change are identified. Regionally, L1 varieties contrast starkly with some regions (Africa, Indian subcontinent) but – maybe unexpectedly – not with others (Southeast Asia). The results offer insights into current trajectories of change concerning the investigated amplifiers in certain regions and 2-grams: North American varieties are leading a trend away from very towards so and possibly pretty in the future.

Keywords: amplifiers/intensifiers, 2-grams/bigrams, World Englishes/English world-wide, GloWbE
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Adjectival intensification: Trends established in previous studies
  • 3.Data and method
  • 4.Adjective amplification world-wide: A first overview
    • 4.1Overall intensification rates in GloWbE
    • 4.2Type-token ratio of top 10 amplifiers in GloWbE
    • 4.3GloWbE intensifier ranking
  • 5.Focus on: Individual patterns
    • 5.1Identifying 2-grams: Method
    • 5.2 Very world-wide
    • 5.3Frequent vs. infrequent adjectives and their amplifiers: Good vs. sick
    • 5.4Top 10 amplifier-adjective 2-grams world-wide
      • 5.4.1Interregional comparisons (amplifier comparisons across regions)
      • 5.4.2Intra-regional comparisons (regional comparisons across amplifiers)
    • 5.5Going large(r): Regional patterns emerging from the top 100 bigrams (very, so, really, pretty)
  • 6.Discussion & conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 1 November 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.17063.wag
References

References

Aijmer, K.
(2017) The intensifier ‘fucking’ in Spoken BNC14. Paper presented at the ICAME 38 Conference, Prague, Czech Republic.
Arnon, I. & Snider, N.
(2010) More than words: Frequency effects for multi-word phrases. Journal of Memory and Language, 621, 67–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barnfield, K. & Buchstaller, I.
(2010) Intensifiers on Tyneside: Longitudinal developments and new trends. English World-Wide, 31(3), 252–287. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bauer, L. & Bauer, W.
(2002) Adjective boosters in the English of young New Zealanders. Journal of English Linguistics, 30(3), 244–257. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beltrama, A. & Casasanto, L. A.
(2017)  Totally tall sounds totally younger: Intensification at the socio-semantics interface. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 21(2), 154–182. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S. & Finegan, E.
(1999) Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Blumenthal-Dramé, A.
(2012) Entrenchment in Usage-based Theories: What Corpus Data Do and Do not Reveal about the Mind. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Breban, T. & Davidse, K.
(2016) The history of ‘very’ – the directionality of functional shift and (inter)subjectification. English Language and Linguistics, 20(2), 221–249. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brysbaert, M. & New, B.
(2009) Moving beyond Kučera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 977–990. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Buchstaller, I.
(2014) Quotatives. New Trends and Sociolinguistic Implications. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
Bybee, J.
(2003) Mechanisms of change in grammaticization: The role of frequency. In B. D. Joseph & R. D. Janda (Eds.), The Handbook of Historical Linguistics (pp. 602–623). Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chong, P. F. & Nahji, N. S.
(2010) When very intense is not really so intense. Strathy Undergraduate Working Papers on Canadian English, 81, 52–63.Google Scholar
D’Arcy, A.
(2015) Stability, stasis and change. Thee longue durée of intensification. Diachronica, 32(4), 449–493. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davies, M.
(2008–) The Corpus of Contemporary American English: 520 million words, 1990-present. Available online at [URL]
(2010–) The Corpus of Historical American English: 400 million words, 1810–2009. Available online at [URL]
(2013) Corpus of Global Web-Based English: 1.9 billion words from speakers in 20 countries. Available online at [URL]
(2015b) A Reply. English World-Wide, 36(1), 45–47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davis, B. H. & Brewer, J.
(1999) Electronic Discourse: Linguistic Individuals in Virtual Space. Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Davydova, J., A. E. Tytus & E. Schleef
(2017) Acquisition of sociolinguistic awareness by German learners of English: A study in perceptions of quotative be like . Linguistics, 55(4), 783–812. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W.
(1977) Where have all the adjectives gone? Studies in Language, 1(1), 19–80. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fuchs, R. & Gut, U.
(2016) Register variation in intensifier usage across Asian Englishes. In H. Pichler (Ed.), Discourse-pragmatic Variation and Change in English: New Methods and Insights (pp. 183–210). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gries, S. Th., & Mukherjee, J.
(2010) Lexical gravity across varieties of English: An ICE-based study of n-grams in Asian Englishes. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 15(4), 520–548. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hale, C. & Scanlon, J.
(1999) Wired Style: Principles of English Usage in the Digital Age. New York, NY: Broadway Books.Google Scholar
Huddleston, R., & Pullum, G. K.
(2002) The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ito, R. & Tagliamonte, S.
(2003) ‘Well’ weird, ‘right’ dodgy, ‘very’ strange, ‘really’ cool: Layering and recycling in English intensifiers. Language in Society, 32(2), 257–279. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jurafsky, D. & Martin, J. H.
in preparation). Chapter 15: Vector Semantics (Draft of November 7, 2016). In D. Jurafsky & J. H. Martin, Speech and Language Processing (3rd ed.). Retrieved from [URL] (last accessed July 2017).
Kachru, B. B.
(1985) Standards, codification, and sociolinguistic realism: The English language in the Outer Circle. In R. Quirk & H. G. Widdowson (Eds.), English in the World (pp. 11–30). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kennedy, C. & McNally, L.
(2005) Scale structure, degree modification, and the semantics of gradable predicates. Language, 81(2), 345–381. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kortmann, B. & Lunkenheimer, K.
(Eds.) (2013) The Electronic World Atlas of Varieties of English. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. Retrieved from [URL] (last accessed April 2019).
Labov, W.
(1994) Principles of Linguistic Change. Volume 1: Internal Factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Levshina, N.
(2015) How to Do Linguistics with R: Data Exploration and Statistical Analysis. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lorenz, G.
(2002) Really worthwhile or not really significant? A corpus-based approach to the delexicalization and grammaticalization of intensifiers in Modern English. In I. Wischer & G. Diewald (Eds.), New Reflections on Grammaticalization (pp. 143–161). Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Love, R., Dembry, C., Hardie, A., Brezina, V., & McEnery, T.
(2017) The Spoken BNC2014: Designing and building a spoken corpus of everyday conversations. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 22(3), 319–344. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Macauley, R.
(2006) Pure grammaticalization: The development of a teenage intensifier. Language Variation and Change, 181, 267–283.Google Scholar
Mair, C.
(2015) Response to Davies & Fuchs. English World-Wide, 36(1), 29–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McEnery, T., Tono, Y. & Xiao, R.
(2006) Corpus-based Language Studies: An Advanced Resource Book. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Méndez-Naya, B.
(2008) On the history of downright . English Language and Linguistics, 12(2), 267–287. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mesthrie, R. & R. Bhatt
(2008) World Englishes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mukherjee, J.
(2015) Response to Davies & Fuchs. English World-Wide, 36(1), 34–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nelson, G.
(2015) Response to Davies & Fuchs. English World-Wide, 36(1), 38–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nevalainen, T. & Rissanen, M.
(2002) Fairly pretty or pretty fair? On the development and grammaticalization of English downtoners. Language Sciences, 241, 359–380. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oxford English Dictionary Online
Retrieved from [URL] (last accessed April 2019).
Paradis, C.
(1997) Degree Modifiers of Adjectives in Spoken British English. Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar
(2000) ‘It’s well weird’. Degree modifiers of adjectives revisited: The nineties. In J. M. Kirk (Ed.), Corpora Galore: Analyses and Techniques in Describing English (pp. 147–160). Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
(2001) Adjectives and boundedness. Cognitive Linguistics, 12(1), 47–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Partington, A.
(1993) Corpus evidence of language change: The case of intensifiers. In M. Baker, G. Francis & E. Tognini-Bonelli (Eds.), Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair (pp. 177–192). Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perek, F. & Hilpert, M.
(2017) A distributional semantic approach to the periodization of change in the productivity of constructions. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 22(4), 490–520. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peters, P.
(2015) Response to Davies & Fuchs. English World-Wide, 36(1), 41–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quaglio, P.
(2009) Television Dialogue. The Sitcom Friends vs. Natural Conversation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., Svartvik, J.
(1985) A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
R Core Team
(2016) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. [Computer software]. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from [URL] (last accessed April 2019).
Racz, P.
(2012) Operationalising salience: Definite article reduction in the North of England. English Language and Linguistics, 16(1), 57–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reichelt, S. & Durham, M.
(2017) Adjective intensification as a means of characterization: Portraying in-group membership and Britishness in Buffy the Vampire Slayer . Journal of English Linguistics, 45(1), 60–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schneider, E. W.
(2007) Postcolonial English. Varieties around the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schweinberger, M.
(2016) Ongoing change in the New Zealand English intensifier system. Paper presented at the ISLE 4 Conference, Poznan, Poland.
Stenström, A.-B.
(1999) ‘He was really gormless – She’s bloody crap’: Girls, boys and intensifiers. In H. Hasselgård & S. Okesfjell (Eds.), Out of Corpora: Studies in Honour of Stig Johansson (pp. 69–78). Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Stoffel, C.
(1901) Intensives and Down-toners. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, S.
(2008) So different and pretty cool! Recycling intensifiers in Toronto, Canada. English Language and Linguistics, 12(2), 361–394. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, S. & Roberts, C.
(2005) So weird; so cool; so innovative: The use of intensifiers in the television series ‘Friends’. American Speech, 80(3), 280–300. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, S.
(2016) So sick or so cool? The language of youth on the internet. Language in Society, 45(1), 1–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tan, P. K. W. & Tan, D. K. H.
(2008) Attitudes towards non-standard English in Singapore. World Englishes, 27(3/4), 465–479. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Heuven, W. J. B., Mandera, P., Keuleers, E. & Brysbaert, M.
(2014) Subtlex-UK: A new and improved word frequency database for British English. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67(6), 1176–1190. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Rooy, B., & Schäfer, L.
(2003) An evaluation of three POS taggers for the tagging of the Tswana Learner English Corpus. In D. Archer, P. Rayson, A. Wilson & T. McEnery (Eds.), Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics 2003 Conference, Technical Papers Volume 161 (pp. 835–844). Lancaster: University Centre for Computer Corpus Research on Language.Google Scholar
Wagner, S.
(2017) Totally new and pretty awesome: Amplifier-adjective bigrams in GloWbE. Lingua, 2001, 63–83. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(submitted). To each their own – trajectories of change and the role of social factors for high-frequency intensifier-adjective combinations in spoken British English 1994–2014.Google Scholar
Xia, R. & Tao, H.
(2007) A corpus-based sociolinguistic study of amplifiers in British English. Sociolinguistic Studies, 1(2), 241–273.Google Scholar
Zwicky, A.
(2011) “GenX so.” Arnold Zwicky’s Blog. Retrieved from [URL] (last accessed April 2019).
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Funke, Nina & Tobias Bernaisch
2022. Intensifying and downtoning in South Asian Englishes. English World-Wide. A Journal of Varieties of English 43:1 ► pp. 33 ff. DOI logo
Stratton, James M.
2022. Old English intensifiers. Journal of Historical Linguistics 12:1 ► pp. 31 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 31 march 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.