10.5 Envoi 297constructs with verbs of ‘choice,’ whose meaning range from literal to meta-
linguistic, the latter especially in the context of explicit call it X constructs.
A micro- construction crystallizes around if you choose and if you like as well
as earlier if you will ; these entrench around a meso- construction, the if metalin-
guistic clause, which licenses extensions containing other verbs of choice ( pre-
fer , want , wish ). Ultimately, a macro- construction, or high- level abstraction,
the if - indirect conditional , evolves.
Hilpert ( 2013 : Ch. 5) provides an insightful discussion of the development of
“concessive parentheticals” (or “abbreviated concessive clauses”) such as Last
week trains were still running, although irregularly (ex. 18b, p. 172), which he
sees as functioning much like comment clauses. These clauses may differ in
respect to the conjunction used ( if , while , though , although ), the syntactic form
of the clause, their placement relative to the host close, and the type of conces-
sive meaning expressed. He argues that their development cannot be subsumed
under the rubric of grammaticalization but is a case of “constructional change.”
Hilpert points out that a “default assumption” is that these structures developed
from full concessive clauses through morphosyntactic reduction and clause
fusion (157, 179) (cf. the matrix clause hypothesis ). An alternative hypothesis
is that they derive by analogy with reduced conditional and temporal clauses.
He fi nds no evidence of the latter, but he does fi nd “suggestive evidence” (190)
of the former. He concludes that although/ though concessive parentheticals
still resemble their full clausal counterparts, and thus likely develop through
reduction, with increasing subjectifi cation (both compatible with a grammati-
calization view). However, they are not characteristic of grammaticalization
in that they may be embedded structures, both syntactically fi xed and clearly
subordinated, and in this respect they differ from discourse markers, the typical
markers of subjectivized meanings, which display syntactic freedom and fl ex-
ibility (200). Moreover, his study also shows that while the although/ though
forms gradually converge or level, forms in if and while actually diverge and
become more varied, a process that would be unexpected in grammaticaliza-
tion. In a Construction Grammar perspective, he sees a constructional change
involving the rise of a family of three meso- constructions – although/ though ,
if , and while concessive parentheticals – rather than one macro- construction
with an open slot for different conjunctions. Generalizations apply to the high-
est level of abstraction, but below this level “there are many partly and fully
lexically fi xed expressions” (202).
It is to be hoped that these initial forays into the development of pragmatic
markers in a Construction Grammar framework will lead to further such
studies.