On the verge of tears and the brink of death
A distinctive multivariate analysis of two functionally overlapping idiomatic constructions in English
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54337/ojs.globe.v19i1.10503Abstract
The two idiomatic constructions verge of and brink of are often considered overlapping constructions that express impending future events. Moreover, it is held that brink of in particular tends to express negative events such as disasters, misfortune, and the like. While both are documented in many dictionaries of English, and verge of is sometimes described in English grammars, neither construction had really been systematically studied before Wiliński published a research article in 2017 in which a distinctive collexeme analysis mapped distinctive patterns in the lexical items appearing after of in either construction. Taking a step further, the present study, drawing on data from the Corpus of Contemporary American English, applies a corpus-based multivariate version of distinctive collexeme analysis to the two constructions, which not only takes collexemes into consideration but involves 11 additional variables, such as, for example, the preposition before verge and brink, semantic prosody, and discourse prosody as well as register. Thus, this article presents usage-based distinctive collo-profiles pertaining to the two constructions that offer more detailed pictures than traditional monovariate analyses can.
References
Bolinger, Dwight (1968). ‘Entailment and the meaning of structures’. Glossa, 2: 119–127.
Bublitz, Wolfram (1996). ‘Semantic prosody and cohesive company: Somewhat predictable’. Leuvense Bijdragen: Tijdschriift voor Germaanse Filologie, 85(1): 7–34
Bybee, Joan & Paul Hopper (2001). ‘Introduction to frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure’. In Bybee, Joan & Paul Hopper (eds.), Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 1–24.
Carter, Ronald & Michael McCarthy (2006). Cambridge Grammar of English: A Comprehensive Guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Croft, William A. (2001). Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001
Croft, William A. (2005). ‘Logical and typological arguments for Radical Construction Grammar’. In Östman, Jan-Ola & Mirjam Fried (eds.), Construction Grammars: Cognitive Grounding and Theoretical Extensions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 273–314.
Davies, Mark (2008–). The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA). https://www.english-corpora.org/coca/.
Fillmore, Charles J. (1988). ‘The mechanics of “Construction Grammar”’. BLS, 14: 35–55. https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v14i0.1794
Fillmore, Charles J., Paul Kay & Mary Catherine O’Connor (1988). ‘Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone’. Language, 64(3): 501–539. https://doi.org/10.2307/414531
Goldberg, Adele E. (1995). Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Gries, Stefan Th. (2010). ‘Behavioral Profiles: a fine-grained and quantitative approach in corpus-based lexical semantics’. The Mental Lexicon, 5(3): 323–346. https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.5.3.04gri
Gries, Stefan Th. (2024). Coll.analysis 4.1. A script for R to compute collostructional analyses. https://www.stgries.info/teaching/groningen/index.html.
Gries, Stefan Th. & Dagmar S. Divjak (2009). ‘Behavioral profiles: a corpus-based approach towards cognitive semantic analysis’. In Evans, Vyvyan & Stephanie S. Pourcel (eds.), New directions in cognitive linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Gries, Stefan Th., & Anatol Stefanowitsch (2004). ‘Extending collostructional analysis: A corpus-based perspective on ‘alternations’’. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 9(1): 97–129. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.9.1.06gri
Hahsler, Michael, Bettina Grün & Kurt Hornik (2005). ‘arules — A computational environment for mining association rules and frequent item sets’. Journal of Statistical Software 14(15): 1–25. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v014.i15
Herbst, Thomas (2018). ‘Is language a collostructicon? A proposal for looking at collocations, valency, argument structure and other constructions’. In Cantos-Gómez, Pascual & Moisé Almela-Sánchez (eds.), Lexical Collocation Analysis: Advances and Applications. Cham: Springer. 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92582-0_1
Hilpert, Martin (2019). Construction Grammar and its Application to English (2nd ed.). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781474433624
Hjulmand, Lise-Lotte & Helge Schwarz (2017). A Concise Contrastive Grammar of English for Danish Students (5th ed.). Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur.
Hughes, Geoffrey & Tom McArthur (1992). ‘Headline’. In McArthur, Tom (eds.), The Oxford Companion to the English Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 464–466.
Hunston, Susan & Gill Francis (1999). Pattern Grammar: The Principles and Practices of Corpus-driven Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Jensen, Kim E. (2017). ‘Kan konstruktioner have semantisk prosodi?’. Ny Forskning i Grammatik, 24: 62–85. https://doi.org/10.7146/nfg.v25i24.97245
Jensen, Kim E. (2025). ‘Well, maybe you shouldn’t go around shaving poodles: Collostructional semantic and discursive prosody in the go (a)round Ving and go (a)round and V constructions’. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 21(3): 577–600. https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2024-0018
Jensen, Kim E. & Stefan Th. Gries (2025). ‘GO (a)round and V vs. GO (a)round Ving: A multivariate distinctive collexeme analysis based on association rules’. Cognitive Linguistic Review. [E-pub ahead of print].
Juul, Sophia Aakjær (2020). ‘Used to + VINFINITIVE vs. would + VINFINITIVE: A case of constructional synonymy?’. Language Works, 5(1): 21–37.
Kemmer, Suzanna & Michael Barlow (2000). ‘Introduction: A usage-based conception of language’. In Barlow, Michael & Suzanne Kemmer (eds.), Usage-based Models of Language. Stanford: Stanford University Press. vii–xxviii.
Kövecses, Zoltan & Péter Szabó (1996). ‘Idioms: A view from cognitive semantics’. Applied Linguistics, 17: 326–355. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/17.3.326
Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Langacker, Ronald W. (1987). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar – Vol. 1: Theoretical Pre-requisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Leclerq, Benoît & Cameron Morin (2023). ‘No equivalence: A New principle of no synonymy’. Constructions, 15(1): 1–16.
Leech, Geroffrey & Jan Svartvik (1975). A Communicative Grammar of English. London: Longman.
Lipka, Leonhard & Hans-Jörg Schmid (1994). ‘To begin with: Degrees of idiomaticity, textual functions and pragmatic exploitations of a fixed expression’. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik, 42: 6–15.
Louw, Bill (1993). ‘Irony in the text or insincerity in the writer? The diagnostic potential of semantic prosodies’. In Baker, Mona, Gill Francis & Elena Tognini-Bonelli (eds.), Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 157–175.
Merriam-Webster (n.d. a). ‘On the verge of’. In Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary. https//www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/on%20the%20verge%20of.
Merriam-Webster (n.d. b).’The brink’. In Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/the%20brink.
Olguín Martínez, Jesus F. & Stefan Th. Gries (2024). ‘If not for-if it weren’t/wasn’t for counterfactual constructions: A multivariate extension of collostructional analysis’. Cognitive Semantics, 10(2): 158–189. https://doi.org/10.1163/23526416-bja10067
Partington, Alan (2004). ‘“Utterly content in each other’s company”: Semantic prosody and semantic preference’. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 9: 131–156. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.9.1.07par
Patten, Amanda L. (2014). ‘The historical development of the it-cleft: A comparison of two different approaches’. In Gisborne, Nikolas & Willem B. Hollmann (eds.), Theory and Data in Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 87–114.
Stubbs, Michael (2001). Words and Phrases: Corpus Studies of Lexical Semantics. Oxford: Blackwell.
Tognini-Bonelli, Elena (2001). Corpus Linguistics at Work. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Graeme Trousdale (2014). ‘Contentful constructionalization’. Journal of Historical Linguistics, 4(2): 256–283. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhl.4.2.04tra
Wiliński, Jaroslaw (2017). ‘On the brink of-NOUN vs. On the verge of-NOUN: A distinctive collexeme analysis’. Research in Language, 15(4): 425–443. https://doi.org/10.1515/rela-2017-0024
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Articles published in Globe: A Journal of Language, Culture and Communication are following the license Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License: Attribution - NonCommercial - NoDerivs (by-nc-nd). Further information about Creative Commons
