Low Transitive Constructions as Typical Clauses in English: A Case Study of the Functions of Clauses with the Nonverbal Predicate <i>be</i> in Stance Displays

Abstract

Low transitive constructions are ubiquitous in English conversation and as such can be considered “typical” clauses. This article furthers this claim by showing that these constructions are also most frequent in a different genre: arguments between participants at organized protests. It has been argued that one reason these constructions are so frequent is that they function to display participants’ stances. Arguments are a type of interaction where stance displays abound. In fact, they are defined as sequences of utterances that display opposing stances. Thus, the study goes on to examine how the most frequent of the low transitive constructions in the data—clauses with the nonverbal predicate be—function to display opposition across utterances. Du Bois has analyzed stance as resonance across utterances, created from structural parallelism, and he argues that slight changes between linguistic forms can create differing focal points that index contrasts. This framework is used to analyze how participants use the multiple semantic functions of be clauses across interactional sequences to display and modify their stances in response to their opponent. It is suggested that the versatility and ambiguity of be clauses are especially useful in arguments where participants do not share a set of common beliefs.

Keywords

• LT construction
• protest argument
• stance
• copula
• existential clause
• equational function