This page is intended as a comprehensive bibliography of pseudocoordination in English; for discussion, see Ross (2021). If you have any feedback or additional references to suggest, please contact me.
- Description status: mentioned in many sources, including detailed studies
- Current bibliographic coverage: incomplete
- Total references: 39
- Last updated: December 2022, summarized based on dissertation (Dec. 2021)
For an overview of English pseudocoordination, see Section 22.214.171.124 of Ross (2021); two major types are motion pseudocoordination with go and come (Ross 2021: Chapter 5) and control pseudocoordination with verbs including try (Ross 2021: Chapter 6). Despite the extent of research on English in general, as well as the number of sources mentioning pseudocoordination for example as an exception to typical behavior of coordinate structures, there are relatively few detailed studies dedicated to this topic. Some important references are included below.
Primary references for English pseudocoordination
Bachmann, Ingo. 2013. Has go-V ousted go-and-V? A study of the diachronic development of both constructions in American English. In Hilde Hasselgård, Jarle Ebeling & Signe Oksefjell Ebeling (eds.), Corpus perspectives on patterns of lexis, 91–111. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.57.09bac
Brook, Marisa & Sali A. Tagliamonte. 2016. Why Does Canadian English Use try to but British English Use try and? Let’s Try and/to Figure It Out. American Speech 91(3). 301–326. https://doi.org/10.1215/00031283-3701026
Brown, Jessica M. M. 2017. Heads and adjuncts: An experimental study of subextraction from participials and coordination in English, German and Norwegian. University of Cambridge Ph.D. dissertation. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.14324
Carden, Guy & David Pesetsky. 1977. Double-Verb Constructions, Markedness, and a Fake Co-ordination. Chicago Linguistic Society 13. 82–92.
Cardinaletti, Anna & Giuliana Giusti. 2001. “Semi-lexical” motion verbs in Romance and Germanic. In Norbert Corver & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds.), Semi-lexical categories: the function of content words and the content of function words, 371–414. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110874006.371
Cormack, Annabel & Neil Smith. 1994. Serial verbs. University College London Working Papers in Linguistics 6. 63–88.
de Vos, Mark. 2004. Pseudo coordination is not subordination. Linguistics in the Netherlands 21. 181–192. https://doi.org/10.1075/avt.21.20vos
de Vos, Mark. 2005. The syntax of verbal pseudo-coordination in English and Afrikaans. Utrecht: LOT.
de Vos, Mark. 2007. And as an aspectual connective in the event structure of pseudo-coordinative constructions. In Agnès Celle & Ruth Huart (eds.), Connectives as discourse landmarks, 49–70. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.161.07vos
Flach, Susanne. 2017. Idiomatic singleton or prototype? A productivity analysis of be-ADJ-and-V. Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association 5(1). 129–141. https://doi.org/10.1515/gcla-2017-0010
Hommerberg, Charlotte & Gunnel Tottie. 2007. Try to or try and? Verb complementation in British and American English. ICAME Journal 31. 45–64.
Hopper, Paul. 2002. Hendiadys and auxiliation in English. In Joan L. Bybee & Michael Noonan (eds.), Complex Sentences in Grammar and Discourse: Essays in honor of Sandra A. Thompson, 145–173. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/z.110.09hop
Hopper, Paul. 2007. Verb Serialization with to take in English, with a note on French and German. In M. M. Jocelyne Fernandez (ed.), Combat pour les langues du monde / Fighting for the world’s languages: hommage à Claude Hagège, 199–210. Paris: Harmattan.
Hopper, Paul. 2008. Emergent Serialization in English: Pragmatics and Typology. In Jeff Good (ed.), Linguistic universals and language change, 253–284. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199298495.003.0011
Huddleston, Rodney D. & Geoffrey K. Pullum (eds.). 2002. The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316423530
Koops, Christian. 2004. Emergent aspect constructions in Present-Day English. In Günter Radden & Klaus-Uwe Panther (eds.), Studies in Linguistic Motivation, 121–154. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Lakoff, George. 1986. Frame Semantic Control of the Coordinate Structure Constraint. Chicago Linguistic Society 22(2). 152–168.
Lind, Åge. 1983. The variant forms try and/try to. English Studies 64(6). 550–563. https://doi.org/10.1080/00138388308598291
Newman, John & Sally Rice. 2004. Patterns of usage for English SIT, STAND, and LIE: A cognitively-inspired exploration in corpus linguistics. Cognitive Linguistics 15(3). 351–396. https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2004.013
Nicolle, Steve. 2009. Go-and-V, come-and-V, go-V and come-V: A corpus-based account of deictic movement verb constructions. English Text Construction 2(2). 185–208. https://doi.org/10.1075/etc.2.2.03nic
Poutsma, Hendrik. 1917. Hendiadys in English: Together with some observations on the construction of certain verbs I & II. Neophilologus 2(1). 202–218, 284–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01509135 & https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01509152
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik. 1985. A Comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.
Ross, Daniel. 2013. Dialectal variation and diachronic development of try-complementation. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences: Illinois Working papers 38. 108–147. http://hdl.handle.net/2142/46461
Ross, Daniel. 2014. The importance of exhaustive description in measuring linguistic complexity: The case of English try and pseudocoordination. In Frederick J. Newmeyer & Laurel B. Preston (eds.), Measuring Grammatical Complexity, 202–216. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199685301.003.0010
Ross, Daniel. 2015. What can Faroese pseudocoordination tell us about English inflection? LSO Working Papers in Linguistics, University of Wisconsin-Madison 10. 74–91. https://langsci.wisc.edu/working-papers-in-linguistics/
Ross, Daniel. 2018. Small corpora and low-frequency phenomena: try and beyond contemporary, standard English. Corpus 18. https://doi.org/10.4000/corpus.3574
Ross, Daniel. 2021. Pseudocoordination, Serial Verb Constructions and Multi-Verb Predicates: The relationship between form and structure. University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Ph.D. dissertation. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5546425
Ross, John Robert. 1967. Constraints on Variables in Syntax. MIT Ph.D. dissertation. http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/15166
Schmerling, Susan F. 1975. Asymmetric coordination and rules of conversation. In Peter Cole & Jerry L. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts, 211–231. New York: Academic Press.
Stefanowitsch, Anatol. 1999. The go-and-Verb construction in a cross-linguistic perspective: image-schema blending and the construal of events. In Dawn Nordquist & Catie Berkenfield (eds.), Proceedings of the Second Annual High Desert Linguistics Society Conference, 1999, 123–134. Albuquerque, University of New Mexico: High Desert Linguistics Society.
Stefanowitsch, Anatol. 2000. The English GO-(PRT)-AND-VERB Construction. Berkeley Linguistics Society 26(1). 259–270. https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v26i1.1158
Tieken-Boon van Ostade, Ingrid & Carmen Ebner. 2017. Prescriptive Attitudes to English Usage. In Mark Aronoff (ed.), Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics (Online). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.271
Tottie, Gunnel. 2012. On the History of try with Verbal Complements. In Sarah Chevalier & Thomas Honegger (eds.), Words, Words, Words: Philology and Beyond: Festschrift for Andreas Fischer on the Occasion of his 65th Birthday, 199–214. Tübingen: Narr Francke Attempto.
Wulff, Stefanie. 2006. Go-V and go-and-V in English: A case of constructional synonymy? In Stefan Th. Gries & Anatol Stefanowitsch (eds.), Corpora in Cognitive Linguistics: Corpus-Based Approaches to Syntax and Lexis, 101–125. Berlin: de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197709.101
Wulff, Stefanie. 2008. Das Prinzip der Nicht-Synonymität: V1-and-V2 und V1-V2 im Englischen. In Anatol Stefanowitsch & Kerstin Fischer (eds.), Konstruktionsgrammatik. 2: Von der Konstruktion zur Grammatik, 189–201. Tübingen: Stauffenburg-Verl.
Zwicky, Arnold M. 1990. What are we talking about when we talk about serial verbs? Ohio State University Working Papers in Linguistics 39. 1–13.
Celtic English subordinating-and
There is also another construction with so-called 'subordinating-and' found in dialects of English in close contact with Celtic languages, where and introduces a non-finite clause. Given that this construction involves the linking element 'and' plus a dependent clause, this could be considered a type of para-hypotaxis rather than pseudocoordination in a strict sense (cf. Ross 2021).
Häcker, Martina. 1994. Subordinate and-clauses in Scots and Hiberno-English: origins and development. Scottish language 13. 34–50.
Häcker, Martina. 1999. And him no more than a Minister’s man: the English subordinating and-construction in cross-linguistic perspective. Leeds Working Papers in Linguistics and Phonetics 7. 36–48.
Ó Baoill, Colm. 1997. The Scots-Gaelic Interface. In Charles Jones (ed.), The Edinburgh history of the Scots language, 551–568. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. [Page 564]
Ross, Daniel. 2021. Pseudocoordination, Serial Verb Constructions and Multi-Verb Predicates: The relationship between form and structure. University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Ph.D. dissertation. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5546425 [Sections 126.96.36.199 & 3.3]