English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The present article examines the usage of coordinators as subordinating devices. An investigation of a corpus of spoken American English reveals that  and  and  but  can occupy clause-final position and be used for marking syntactic and functional asymmetries. It has been pointed out that such final coordinators arise as a result of interactional contingencies (Barth-Weingarten 2014, Dialogism and the emergence of final particles: The case of  and . In Susanne Günthner, Wolfgang Imo &amp; Jörg Bücker (eds.),  Grammar and dialogism , 335–366. Berlin &amp; New York: Mouton de Gruyter). However, a cross-linguistic observation suggests that not all coordinators can be used as clause-final elements. Our research demonstrates that the emergence of clause-final  and  and  but  does not only come from interactional needs but also presupposes typological requirements. Head-initial (VO) languages like English, where adverbial clauses are marked by clause-initial subordinators, are subject to three competing motivations for the ordering of main and adverbial clauses (Diessel 2005, Competing motivations for the ordering of main and adverbial clauses.  Linguistics  43(3). 449–470). Our study contends that clause-final coordinators serve as  stopgap subordinators , which help to resolve such competition between the three motivating forces.

Stopgap subordinators and and but : A non-canonical structure emergent from interactional needs and typological requirements