Printer Friendly


1. Introduction

Exemplification is a discourse strategy by which the meaning of a unit with a general referent (the general element or GE) is clarified by means of a second, more specific unit (the exemplifying element or EE). In an exemplifying construction, the referent of the GE includes the referent of the EE, which is an example of that general term. The importance of examples in communication lies in the fact that they have a deeper impact on the interlocutor than the general assertions that they carry, given their greater persuasive power (see Brosius and Bathelt 1994; Gibson and Zillmann 1994; Perry and Gonzenbach 1997; and Lischinsky 2008, among others). On similar lines, they also make a text more graspable, in that they "have the capacity of making abstractions comprehensible" (Zillmann and Brosius 2000: 15). In other words, examples constitute a more tangible, concrete point in the writer's otherwise abstract discourse and hence render the text more accessible for the reader (see Hyland 2007).

In prototypical exemplifying constructions, the use of a link indicating the inclusion of the EE within the GE, which I will call the exemplifying marker or EM, is compulsory. According to Meyer (1992: 77), the inventory of present-day English EMs is as follows: for example, for instance, e.g., like, say and such as. To this list, Quirk et al. (1985: 1308) add including and included. A further item can be included here, in that the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) assigns an exemplifying function to the form as. Example (1) below is a prototypical exemplifying construction, where the GE (several so-called 'hyphenated disciplines') and the EE (bio-linguistics, psycho-linguistics, and socio-linguistics) are linked by means of the EM for example.

(1) This interest in linguistic knowledge has resulted in the establishment of several so-called 'hyphenated disciplines', for example: bio-linguistics, psycho-linguistics, and socio-linguistics. (OED, s.v. biolinguistics, n.; 1974 Eng. Jrnl. 63 65/1)

This paper is concerned with English EMs over the course of time. To this end, current EMs will be described and classified (see section 2), but other obsolete forms which had an exemplifying function from the Old English (OE) period will also be identified (cf. section 3). Finally, some items which might be acquiring an exemplifying function at present will be considered briefly in section 4.

The main sources of information for this paper are the OED and the Middle English Dictionary (MED), although a wide range of present-day dictionaries have been also consulted in order to complement information from these two historical sources. The usefulness of the OED as a historical corpus is defended by Hoffmann (2004) and Partington (2015), among others, who note the wide range of sources from which its quotations are drawn, as well as their veracity. Given that the analysis proposed here is not of a quantitative nature, and that the OED covers the whole history of the English language, it is an optimal source of data for our purposes. Additionally, since this study aims to provide a thorough inventory of English EMs, the information from historical dictionaries will be supplemented not only by a number of corpus samples, but also by online examples, in that the Web is an invaluable source of real data for the study of linguistic change (cf. Hundt, Nesselhauf and Biewer 2007 and Gatto 2014, among many others).

2. Current EMs: A Classification

In this section, the list of present-day English (PDE) EMs is provided. In order to achieve a better understanding of these forms, a classification of EMs is here proposed on the basis of two main traits, namely the degree of emphasis which the EM conveys on the example which it introduces (cf. section 2.1) and the position of the EM in the exemplifying sequence (cf. section 2.2). These two classifications will account for the potential combinations of EMs in the same exemplifying sequence, as discussed in section 2.3.

2.1. Semantic Classification of EMs

2.1.1. Neutral EMs (1)

The group of neutral markers is made up of forms which introduce the EE without putting any emphasis on the example chosen. These neutral EMs are for example, for instance and e.g.

The first occurrence of the EM for example found in the OED dates back to 1340-1370. In this early instance, for example occurs sentence-initially. For the sake of clarity, an approximate translation is provided for this and other examples with possibly obscure meanings in PDE.

(2) For ensample, bi my sawe Sop mow 3e fonge Of iubiter. (OED, s.v. fang v.1, 1d; 1340-1370 Alex. & Dind. 552)

'For example, by my story you can learn the truth about Jupiter'.

In turn, the earliest unambiguous occurrences of both for instance and e.g. are rather late, especially in comparison with for example. These are (3) and (4) below, dating from 1657 and 1591 respectively, although the short form e.g. is first attested in 1682. No consensus regarding the correct punctuation in this abbreviated form exists. Thus, eg, eg. and less frequently, can also be found.

(3) The proof of this I found, by looking on the Stars [...] For instance; There is a little Star, called Auriga [etc.]. (OED, s.v. instance n., 6.b, 1657 R. Ligon True Hist. Barbados 19)

(4) A woman may passe where a flie cannot, exempli gratia, into the Popes bed chamber. (OED, s.v. exempli gratia, adv.; 1591 R. W. Martine Mar-Sixtus sig. B2v)

The OED proposes the expression exempli causa as a variant of exempli gratia. Examples with this marker are older than instances with exempli gratia, and its use is registered in the OED from 1569 until 1802. Even though this expression is not marked as obsolete in the OED, and indeed some examples can be found on the Internet, its use is scarce.

The differences between these markers, when it comes to for example and for instance, are very subtle. In fact, dictionaries tend to consider them as interchangeable and rarely make any distinction between the two forms: for example is usually defined as 'for instance' and for instance as 'for example'. However, certain distinctions between the two EMs become evident in usage. Data from Biber et al. (1999) show that for example is used up to five times more often than for instance. This may be so simply because the noun example is also more common than the noun instance: in Oxford Dictionaries Pro Online, example appears among the top 1000 frequently used words, while instance does not.

Likewise, The Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary (2008) marks for example with an E (which stands for 'Essential', and thus indicating words that everyone needs to know in order to communicate effectively), whereas for instance is marked with an A (which stands for 'Advanced'). By extension, whereas for example might be considered as a basic and essential expression for any speaker of English, for instance is seen to reflect a more advanced level of proficiency.

Differences can also be found in terms of style. According to The Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (2009: 583), "for instance is slightly less formal than for example and is used more in spoken English". In turn, e.g. is regarded as a rather formal marker, and its use tends to be restricted to parenthetical references (The Chicago Manual of Style 1982: 383).

To conclude this review of neutral EMs, there is also one formula related to the noun example which is found only occasionally with an exemplifying function (for this reason it will be considered only in this section, and not included in the classifications provided in what follows). Let us consider (5) below:

(5) Par exemple; if I want to make une declaration d'amour, why of course I should wish to produce a chef d'oeuvre of eloquence. (OED, s.v. par exemple adv., 1801. B. Thompson tr. A. von Kotzebue Lovers' Vows iv. 64)

The phrase par exemple is attested in the OED from 1801 onwards, and although at present it is occasionally used as an EM, it is not fully naturalised. Note that example (5), as in most examples where this marker is used in the OED, contains other French words, thus indicating the strong connection between this expression and French. The socio-historical context of the times may help us explain the borrowing of this phrase when other similar devices were already available in the language. The borrowing of French or Latin words (among them, some of the current English EMs) in Middle English (ME) times was commonplace. After the Norman Conquest, English was greatly influenced by the Norman variety of French, "inevitable" when "two languages exist side by side for a long time and the relations between the people speaking them are as intimate as they were in England" (Baugh and Cable 1993: 163). However, although such intimate contact no longer existed in the Modern English (ModE) period, French still had an impact on English (especially on its lexis), though to a lesser extent. The reasons for this influence, however, were somewhat different. Many intellectuals pointed to the "insufficiency" of English, which was considered to be "'rude' and 'barbarous', inexpressive and ineloquent, and it did not have the technical vocabulary required in specialised domains of language use" (Nevalainen 1999: 358). Hence, writers like Sir Thomas Elyot introduced many French terms to enrich their vocabulary, given that "French still had high prestige as a literary language" (Barber 1976: 42). Expressions like par exemple, then, were borrowed in an attempt to sound more intellectual and erudite, and as such this EM is markedly formal.

2.1.2. Hypothetical EMs

The group of hypothetical EMs is represented by say (also occasionally let's say; cf. OED, s.v. say, v.1 and int., 17.b). Say is different from the other markers in that the example it introduces is, in many cases, a supposition, a hypothesis. That is, the EE introduced by say is given as a hypothetical illustration of the GE, although there is no guarantee that this is itself included in it. The earliest occurrences of say as EMs provided by the OED date back to 1736. Let us consider an instance of this marker:

(6) Pleasure and Pain are to a certain Degree, say to a very high Degree, distributed amongst us without any apparent Regard to the Merit or Demerit of Characters. (OED, s.v. say, 1736, Bp. J. Butler Analogy of Relig. i. iii. 66)

In (6), to a very high degree is an example of to a certain degree. In this example, the EM comes before the EE, although according to the OED it frequently comes after it (cf. OED, s.v. say, v.1 and int.; 17.b).

2.1.3. Comparative EMs

The group of comparative EMs consists of the forms like, such as and (by extension) as. Although I am aware of the controversy surrounding the use of the label comparative to denote this group of EMs (which will be explained later in this section), I will use the term because it is exactly the comparative origin of these markers which makes them alike. Let us consider such EMs individually.

The complex EM such as consists of two elements which have been part of the English language since Old English times. However, the exemplifying use of this phrase is not attested in the OED until the late 17th century (OED, s.v. such adj. and pron. II.9.d).

(7) If their Characters were wholly perfect (such as for Example, the Character of a Saint or Martyr in a Play). (OED, s.v. such adj. and pron., II.9.d 1695. Dryden in tr. C. A. Du Fresnoy De Arte Graphica Pref. p. xvi)

Interestingly, this example shows one recurrent feature of EMs in their early occurrences, the fact that such as combines with another EM, in particular for example (for further information on these combinations, see section 2.3). In this case, the predicate were wholly perfect intervenes between the GE and the EE.

Even though neither Quirk et al. (1985) nor Meyer (1992) mention as in their list of PDE EMs, the OED assigns an exemplifying function to this form: 'Introducing instances exemplifying or illustrating a general designation: like and including, such as, of the kind of; for instance, for example' (OED, s.v. as adv. and conj., B. II.19). The first occurrence of the exemplifying use of as attested in the OED is in fact very early, dating from the early 13th century:

(8) [THORN]es patriarchies, alse abel and noe and abraham. (OED, s.v. as adv. and conj., 19; a1225 (?OE) MS Lamb. in R. Morris Old Eng. Homilies (1868) 1st Ser. 81 (MED))

'These patriarchs, as Abel and Noah and Abraham'.

In this example, the units in exemplification are short noun phrases: the GE is Pes patriarches and the EE abel and noe and abraham. However, the OED makes clear that the EM as is an elliptical variant of such as. The reasons which may condition the choice of such as over as are the following. On the one hand, such as is phonetically heavier than as, which is extremely short. On the other, as is a high-frequency word which can be used as a noun, an adverb or a conjunction (cf. OED, as n.1, n.2, adv. and conj.). In fact, Fry, Kress and Fountoukidis (2006) and Paquot (2007) classify this form as the 16th most frequent word in English for Academic Purposes. Taking into account the formal and semantic properties of these two items, such as may be preferred to as because it is more straightforwardly and unambiguously recognised as an EM.

The form like "is arguably the most versatile four-letter word in the English language" (Peters 2004: 323). As stated in the OED, it may function as a verb, noun, adjective, adverb, preposition and conjunction (cf. OED, s.v. like n.1; like adj., adv., prep., and conj., and n.2; like v.1; like v.2). Moreover, at present like is also acquiring a number of additional uses, as a quotative marker and a pragmatic marker (for more information on the different uses of like in PDE, see Meehan 1991; Romaine and Lange 1991; Dailey-O'Cain 2000; Iyeiri et al. 2005; D'Arcy 2006, 2007; and Lopez-Couso and Mendez-Naya 2012, 2014, among others). The exemplifying use of this item develops in the Early Modern English (EModE) period, 1593 being the earliest attestation in the OED. In this early instance, there are two occurrences of like as an EM linking short noun phrases in both cases:

(9) Be thou Iohn, the many-tongued Linguist, like Andrewes, or the curious Intelligencer, like Bodley. (OED, s.v. like adj., adv., conj., and prep., D.2.a, 1593. G. Harvey Pierces Supererogation Aunsw. Lett. sig. **3v)

The use of like as an EM is not devoid of controversy. During the 20th century, it acquired a stigmatised character which, for some, remains the case in PDE. The rise of the stigmatisation of like can be detected in different editions of A Dictionary of Modern English Usage. In its first edition (1926), Fowler gives 'such as' as one of the meanings which like could have. At the time, Fowler apparently saw nothing wrong with this exemplifying use of like. However, this attitude changed in subsequent editions of the dictionary, when an editorial eyebrow was raised. Thus, Robert Burchfield, the editor of the third edition (1998), claims that the use of like with the meaning of 'of the class of, for example' is problematic as it could be potentially ambiguous: "for example, the title of Kingsley Amis's novel Take a Girl like You (1960) could be taken to mean 'a girl, for example, you' or 'a girl resembling you'. Had the title been 'Take a Girl Such as You', there would have been no such ambiguity" (Burchfield 1998: 459). Burchfield was probably influenced by a number of reactions against the use of exemplifying like that had been voiced in the second half of the 20th century. Two staunch opponents of this exemplifying use are Kilpatrick (1984) and Freeman (1990). According to Freeman (1990: 252), if we use like in the sentence I know many 'beauties' like Elizabeth Taylor, Elizabeth Taylor "would not [be included in the group], since like means similarly or similar to. This means the 'beauties' are similar to her, but she is not among them". And he adds: "To include Ms. Taylor, say, 'I know many 'beauties' such as Elizabeth Taylor'" (see also Bernstein 1971). However, for other coetaneous authors such controversy does not exist. For instance, in 1966 Follett sees nothing wrong in using like to introduce examples, and he even notes a slight difference in meaning between like and such as, namely the degree of definiteness of the EE which they introduce: whereas with such as the EE is indefinite, with like it is definite. In any case, what most authors seem to agree on is that like should preferably be avoided in formal text-types due to its informal nature (see Carter et al. 2011).

Another trait shared by like and such as (and, by extension, by as too) which makes them different from other EMs is the fact that they frequently introduce an integrated EE (especially like). Thus, in (10) below, no pause is made between the GE, i.e. a critic, and the EE, i.e. you, a pause which is common with the other EMs.

(10) A critic like you is one who fights the good fight, contending with stupidity. (OED, s.v. like adj., adv., conj., and prep., D.2.b; 1886. R. L. Stevenson Lett. (1899) II. 41)

2.1.4. Focalising EMs (2)

This group of EMs comprises those forms which, without being as emphatic as particularisers such as especially or particularly, add a nuance of emphasis to the EE. In other words, by using focalising EMs, the example chosen is given certain relevance over any other element which might have been used to exemplify the GE. These EMs are including and included. The emphatic character of these two forms is evidenced in Meyer's (1992) semantic classification of appositional types: for Meyer (1992), including (and by extension included too) is a marker of particularisation, not one of exemplification. Thus, in (11), which is the earliest instance in the OED where including can be understood as an EM, the choice of the cook to exemplify the GE four servants is clearly made on purpose.

(11) Four servants died, including the cook. (OED, s.v. including, prep., 1648 J. Lewis & T. Best Let. 4 Dec. in W. Foster Eng. Factories in India 1646-50 (1914) 224)

As far as included is concerned, the use of this form as an EM is recorded for the first time in 1743, one century after the first occurrence of including (cf. (12) below). Here, the GE is all the hands we could muster in both watches, whereas the EE is officers. The EE is short and simple because the EM comes after it, that is, at the end of the exemplifying sequence. A longer unit with this marker could be potentially ambiguous as the reader/hearer only realises that it is a case of exemplification at the end of the sequence.

(12) All the Hands we could muster in both Watches, Officers included, were but twelve. (OED, s.v. muster v.1, 5.a.; 1743 J. Bulkeley & J. Cummins Voy. to South-seas 16)

2.2. Classification of EMs According to their Position in the Exemplifying Sequence

Given that an EM is the link between the GE and the EE, its expected position in the exemplifying sequence is between those two units, namely before the EE. That seems to be, indeed, the only possible position for markers like e.g. (cf. (4)), such as (cf. (7)), as (cf. (8)), like (cf. (10)) and including (cf. (11)). We will call this position P1. In turn, there is only one EM which necessarily follows the EE, namely included, as illustrated in example (12) above. This position will be called P3. The postposition of included is one of the reasons why it is less frequently used than including, which clearly delimits where the EE starts.

The EMs for example, for instance and say deserve special mention as they exhibit peculiar behaviour: their position in the exemplifying sequence is not fixed. They can be used not only in P1 (cf. (1) above) or P3, but also in the middle of the EE (i.e. in what we will call P2; cf. (13)). When an EM is used in P2, it usually isolates a part of the EE, which automatically becomes emphasised. Thus, in (13) below hydrogen is foregrounded and thus given added importance. Say also shows a high degree of mobility, although to a lesser extent.

(13) Many of the fuels being developed today have little or no impact on the environment. Hydrogen, for example, burns completely clean. (Paquot 2007)

As claimed by Fernandez-Bernardez (1994-1995: 118-119), the position of EMs is conditioned by the type of EE which they introduce. Her research focuses on the Spanish marker por ejemplo, but her comments can safely be applied to our markers for example and for instance (and less commonly to say).

* If the EE is a simple noun phrase, the EM can occur in either P1 (cf. (14a)) or P3 (cf. (14b)). However, depending on where exactly it appears in P2, the resulting construction may be ungrammatical (cf. (14c)), or may have a different meaning, as in (14d)), where the EE is of 20/14 and does not refer back to a specific number of basic boxes but to 10,000 boxes.

(14) a. Orders are often given for the equivalent of a specific number of basic boxes, for example, 10,000 boxes of 20/14. (OED, s.v. basic adj. and n.1, a.1f, 1914 J. H. Jones Tinplate Industry 141)

b. Orders are often given for the equivalent of a specific number of basic boxes, 10,000 boxes of 20/14, for example.

c. *Orders are often given for the equivalent of a specific number of basic boxes, 10,000 for example boxes of 20/14.

d. Orders are often given for the equivalent of a specific number of basic boxes, 10,000 boxes for example of 20/14.

* If the EE is a list of noun phrases, that is, an enumeration, the EM can precede it (cf. (15a)) and (16a)), and can follow it when the list is closed (cf. (15b)) but not when it is open (cf. (16b)). Similarly, it can never appear between the different items listed (see (15c) and (16c)).

(15) a. This interest in linguistic knowledge has resulted in the establishment of several so-called 'hyphenated disciplines', for example: bio-linguistics, psycho-linguistics, and socio-linguistics. (OED, s.v. biolinguistics n., 1974 Eng. Jrnl. 63 65/1)

b. This interest in linguistic knowledge has resulted in the establishment of several so-called 'hyphenated disciplines': bio-linguistics, psycho-linguistics, and socio-linguistics, for example.

c. *This interest in linguistic knowledge has resulted in the establishment of several so-called 'hyphenated disciplines': bio-linguistics, for example, psycho-linguistics, and socio-linguistics.

(16) a. In the class of combustibles which I call metalloids, I use only the initial

letters. For example C = carbon, Cu = copper (cuprum), [etc.]. (OED, s.v. cn., initialisms, 1813 tr. J. J. Berzelius in Ann. Philos. 2 359)

b. *In the class of combustibles which I call metalloids, I use only the initial letters. C = carbon, Cu = copper (cuprum), [etc.], for example.

c. *In the class of combustibles which I call metalloids, I use only the initial letters. C = carbon, for example, Cu = copper (cuprum), [etc.].

* Finally, if the EE is a whole sentence, the EM can usually occur in any position, P1, P2 or P3:

(17) = (13) a. Many of the fuels being developed today have little or no impact on the environment. Hydrogen, for example^ burns completely clean.

b. Many of the fuels being developed today have little or no impact on the environment. For example, hydrogen burns completely clean.

c. Many of the fuels being developed today have little or no impact on the environment. Hydrogen burns completely clean, for example.

2.3. Co-occurrence of Markers

Occasionally, EMs may be modified by an added component such as an adverb or a conjunction. When describing the historical development of some appositional markers, Pahta and Nevanlinna (2001: 23) use the term reinforcement to refer to such cases. More specifically, when that added element is another appositional marker, they talk of pleonastic markers. (3) These authors explain the co-occurrence of markers in terms of two main motivations. On the one hand, a disambiguating function may encourage such combinations: "[i]t is a well-known fact that when a word or phrase begins to lose its effect it may be strengthened or reinforced by an additional component" (Pahta and Nevanlinna 2001: 23). In like manner, when a word or phrase is acquiring a new meaning or function, it may also need some kind of reinforcement. Pahta and Nevanlinna's (2001) description here can be extrapolated to the origin of EMs. Thus, in many of their early occurrences EMs combined with other EMs, especially with as. This need to co-occur with other EMs may be due to the fact that the emerging marker is still not straightforwardly identified as such, and therefore needs to be reinforced by an already established and unambiguous EM; hence the use of as, a form which had been used as an EM since at least the 13th century, to reinforce emerging EMs.

Pahta and Nevanlinna give another possible explanation of these combinations. When a second marker or another reinforcing element is added, the distance between the anchor and the appositive is bigger, and this can be used by the speaker as a strategy "to prepare the addressee better for the expository part of the apposition or to stress the importance of the second unit" (Pahta and Nevanlinna 2001: 23).

In addition to these reasons, the clustering of markers may also be explained on the basis of the semantics of the EM added. Thus, EMs cannot combine at random: only certain markers can co-occur, and even in these combinations the markers come in a given order. This is no doubt related to the fact that some markers show a tighter bond with the GE to which they refer than to others: in general terms, neutral EMs have a more autonomous character and can therefore be separated from their GEs, whereas localising and comparative forms exhibit a stronger connection with their GEs. Figure 1 illustrates the potential combinations of EMs. The starting-point of the arrows indicates which marker comes first.

As we can see, all the groups can combine with for example, for instance and e.g. In all such cases, these three forms follow the other EMs. The two most emphatic groups, focalising EMs and comparative EMs, never combine with each other. Note that included is not considered here, since as an EM it has not been found to occur with another EM. Two main reasons may explain this. On the one hand, included is rarely used as an EM, which means that combinations with this form may simply be difficult to find. On the other hand, given that it occupies P3 in the exemplifying sequence, this makes its combination with other EMs highly unlikely. In the sections that follow, the different combinations of EMs are examined in detail.

2.3.1. EM + for example, for instance, e.g.

The formulas for example, for instance and e.g. are, from a semantic point of view, the most prototypical markers of exemplification in PDE: they are neutral markers which introduce the EE without adding any emphasis to it. As a consequence, when used after another EM they may cancel any potential connotation of emphasis conveyed by the preceding marker. Given that for example is the most neutral and unmarked EM, it is the one which most frequently combines with other EMs. Some of the possible combinations of an EM plus a neutral EM are illustrated in the following examples, taken from the OED, from the corpus Glo Wbe (which contains real linguistic data taken from the Web), and from creditable web pages.

(18) You will need to provide documents about you and the person who has died, including, for example, the full name, date of birth and passport number of the person who has died. (Glo WbE, Great Britain,

(19) If someone you knew who had just lost a loved one sat down opposite you, in say a cafe for instance, you would not begin to mock their loss. (

In the majority of examples, the EMs occur side by side, but they can also be separated by the EE. This is illustrated in (19), where the EM say occupies P1 and for instance P3. In fact, examples where the EE separates the two EMs are not infrequent, at least in previous stages of the language, especially when the EM which comes in second place is for instance. Additionally, the OED provides some peculiar combinations of EMs where the markers for example and for instance are inserted between the two items which constitute the complex marker such as.

(20) Yet there are binary compounds which are not electrolysable, such, for instance, as pure water, and chloride of sulphur. ( OED, s.v. electrolysable/electrolyzable adj., 1856. W. A. Miller Elements Chem. II. 1124)

2.3.2. EM + say

In similar fashion, say may also follow other EMs. Considering the semantic content of the EM say discussed in section 2.1.2. above, the pleonastic use of this marker in an exemplifying construction might be a strategy used by the speaker/writer to add a connotation of hypothesis to the construction (cf. (21) below). Say cannot, however, follow for example, for instance or e.g., probably because it is more marked than these EMs.

(21) As for the reconstruction of Iraq, this surely needs to be undertaken chiefly by America and supported by a coalition of the willing, including, say, Spain, Italy and Australia, as well as Britain. (http://www.telegraph.

2.3.3. Other Combinations

In all the examples considered, we note that the EMs combined are not linked by any conjunction. In fact, except for (19) where the two EMs are separated by intervening material, in the remaining examples the EMs are juxtaposed. The combination of two EMs other than those in Figure 1 above is not possible in PDE. Nevertheless, in some examples two EMs are linked by the coordinating conjunction and, as shown in (22) below. In all such cases, the combinations contain a marker of the comparative group (in particular such as or like) followed by including. Some of these combinations may respond to a desire to avoid the potential ambiguity of the EM like mentioned in section 2.1.3. above: the speaker/writer may feel that, by using like or such as, the example given is not to be included in the GE, but used only as a point of reference with which the GE can be compared. As a consequence, s/he adds a second marker (i.e. including) to make the relation of inclusion clear.

(21) There are large voids surrounded or nearly surrounded by thin dense regions which are sections of structures like (and including) the Great Wall. (The Smithsonian/NASA Astrophysics Data System. <>)

3. Obsolete EMs

The OED and the MED provide information on some expressions which were used as EMs in the past, but which do not exist with such a function in the present day. These expressions are to bisne, as namely, for the purpose, (as) suppose and several phrases containing the noun example. These formulas are considered individually in what follows.

3.1. To bisne

In OE and ME, the obsolete noun bysen meant 'example' (OED, s.v. bysen n.I.1). Even though the OED does not make an explicit reference to the use of the expression to bisne as an EM, it provides some examples that make it clear that such an expression could be used with an exemplifying value in earlier times. Consider (23) below.

(23) Paronomasia, id est denominatio on Lyden. Pis hiw by[eth] gesett on myslicum andgite, swylce ic pis do to bisne: amans and amens. (OED, s.v. paronomasia n.; OE Byrhtfer[eth] Enchiridion (Ashm.) (1995) iii. iii. 166)

'Paronomasia, i.e. denomination in Latin. This form is made with unlike meaning, as I this do to exemplify: amans and amens'.

In this example, to bisne is followed by colons and then by an example which illustrates a previous explanation. The structure and semantics of these instances suggest, therefore, that to bisne was probably one of the first EMs recorded in English.

3.2. As namely

The main function of namely in PDE is that of an appositional marker of equivalence meaning 'that is to say' (cf. Quirk et al. 1985: 1309), as illustrated in (24). However, this use of namely as a central marker of apposition was not its original function in English. Rather, it was first used as a marker in another subtype of apposition, namely particularisation, with the meaning 'particularly, especially, above all' (OED, s.v. namely adv., 1.a), as in example (25) below (see Lopez-Couso 2016 and Miura 2013, among others).

(24) How can a solution be found to the current disease of contemporary society, namely the international economic crisis? (Quirk et al. 1985: 1307)

(25) Sunnedei ah efri cristenne Mon nomeliche to chirche cume. (OED, s.v. namely adv., 1a. a1225. (OE). MS Lamb. in R. Morris Old Eng. Homilies (1868) 1st Ser. 139)

'On Sunday every Christian man should especially come to church'.

However, namely also had another appositional use in the past. When combined with as, it was used as a synonym of for example (OED, s.v. namely adv., 3.b); that is, it was an EM. In the OED this exemplifying use is attested between 1565 and 1818. The last example given in the OED of as namely is (26) below. Here, as namely links two noun phrases and comes before the EE.

(26) What part or portion can I claim In all the decencies of virtuous sorrow, Which other mourners use? as namely, This black attire, abstraction from society, Good thoughts, and frequent sighs, [etc.]. (OED, s.v. namely adv., 3.b. 1818. C. Lamb John Woodvil v, in Wks. I. 153)

3.3. For the purpose

The idiomatic expression for the purpose has become obsolete as an EM in PDE, but it existed in previous stages of the language (cf. OED, s.v. purpose n., P2) with the meaning 'for example, for instance'. The OED gives two examples of for the purpose from the 17th century where its function is clearly that of an EM. In (27), for the purpose is intonationally delimited by pauses, represented by brackets. It links two nominal elements (the GE those and the EE Catherina Senensis) and comes after the EE.

(27) Those that [...] have entitled themselves to the veneration of posterity; or Catherina Senensis (for the Purpose) that was Sainted by Pius 2. (OED, s.v. purposen., P2. 1680 R. L'Estrange tr. Erasmus 20 Sel. Colloquiesix. 159)

3.4. (As) suppose

The first reference to the exemplifying function of suppose in the OED dates from 1577, whereas its last occurrence dates from 1831. A variant of this EM is as suppose, as illustrated in (28), where a word is the GE and head is its EE. Once more, this example shows the recurrent combination of as with EMs in previous stages of the language. The semantics of this form makes it similar to present-day English say, a marker which conveys a certain nuance of uncertainty about the EE.

(28) Now draw a word (as suppose head) from its natural and proper signification to a civil use, and head will signifie a King. (OED, s.v. suppose v., 11.c.a.; 1658 S. Hudson Vindic. Esence & Unity Church-Catholick Visible (ed. 2) i. 7)

3.5. Formulas with the Noun Example

Along with the current EM for example, the noun example (in its different spellings) occurs in a wide variety of expressions which function as EMs at different points in the history of English. The OED and the MED list the following combinations: example of grace, verbi gratia example (MED, s.v. example 1.b), ensample, ensample as thus and ensample why (MED, s.v. ensample n.1.c), none of which is available in PDE. Examples (29) to (33) below illustrate the use of these EMs.

(29) Ensample: 3if a planete in pe biginnynge hap aspecte [etc.] (MED, s.v. ensamplen., 1.c. (a1398) *Trev. Barth. (Add 27944) 109b/a)

'For example: at the beginning if a planet has the aspect [etc.]'.

(30) Whan the progressioun naturelle endithe in even nombre, by the half therof multiplie pe next totalle ouerere nombre; Example of grace: 1. 2. 3. 4. Multiplie 5 by 2. (MED, s.v. example n., 1.b. c1450 Art Number. (Ashm 396) 45/35)

'When the natural progression ends in an even number, multiply thereof the next total higher number by the half. For example: 1. 2. 3. 4. Multiply 5 by 2'.

(31) Verbi gratia Example: we wille drawe out pe water of ydropic men. (MED, s.v. example n., 1.b. ?a1425 *Chauliac(1) (NY 12) 1b/b)

'For example: we will draw out the water of hydropic men'.

(32) Ensaumple as thus I wolde knowe the degre of the sunne. (MED, s.v. ensamplen., 1.c. c1400 * Chaucer Asstr. (Brussels 4869) 2.1.84a)

For example, I would know the degree of the sun'.

(33) Ensample why, se now thise wise clerkes, That erren aldermost ayeyn a lawe. (MED, s.v. ensamplen., 1.c. a1425(c1385) Chaucer TC (Benson-Robinson) 1.1002)

'For example, see now these wise clerks, that plough everything again downwards'.

Evidence from the MED and the OED indicates that all these formulas were used in the Middle Ages. Notably, all examples containing these formulas in the MED are dated between 1398 and 1450. In light of this we can assert that example was used in a variety of expressions which coexisted with for example during the Middle Ages before for example fully grammaticalised and became the dominant variant.

4. Is the Inventory of English EMs under Renovation?

To close this review of forms which had an exemplifying use at some point in the history of the English language, some items which might be developing such a function at present should be brought to the fore.

In section 2.1.1 above, the form e.g. was described in detail. As specified by Peters (2004: 265), this form should not be confused with i.e., which is a marker of central apposition, in fact one of reformulation, and is synonymous with that is (cf. OED, s.v. I n.1, INITIALISMS). It is used to introduce an explanation or a paraphrase of a previous statement which the author feels is not clear enough. Nevertheless, in light of some real examples and despite some condemnation of its use as an EM, i.e. seems to be closer to exemplification than to reformulation in some recent examples. (34) is one such case, where i.e. is probably mistaken for e.g. Note that in this example the second part (fitness, dieting, exercising, eating behaviour) is not an exhaustive list of the first part (certain topics that potentially encourage people say one thing and then do another); therefore, the latter is not a paraphrase of the former, but a limited list of examples thereof.

(34) Although consumers can be more candid and honest when they are doing it behind the computer, there are certain topics that potentially encourage people to say one thing and then do another (i.e. fitness, dieting, exercising, eating behavior). (GloWbE, Great Britain,

On similar lines, thus might also occasionally be used as an EM. Let us consider (35) below. Here, what comes after thus seems to be an example of how AIDs is still monstrously distorted in political left-wing mythology. We see that thus behaves similarly to for example or for instance when introducing a sentential EE. In fact, given that examples of thus preceding for example or for instance in such cases are not uncommon (cf. (36)), this form might be acquiring some of the semantic traits of those EMs when the two forms do co-occur. However, examples like (32) above, in which this term is part of the obsolete EM ensaumple as thus, might also favour the use of the form as an EM.

(35) And AIDS is still monstrously distorted in political left-wing mythology. Thus, in a group of ideologues, the mention of AIDS will at once inspire denouncements of the CIA who deliberately created the AIDS virus to weaken the Third World. (OED, s.v. AIDS virus n.; 1992 D. Lessing Afr. Laughter 336)

(36) A related error involves the comparison of one family with only part of another family. Thus, for example, Indo-European is still sometimes compared directly with Semitic. (OED, s.v. Indo-European, adj. and n., draft additions 1983; 1987 M. Ruhlen Guide World's Langs. I. vii. 253)

5. Conclusions

This paper has offered a detailed analysis of the English EMs including, included, for example, for instance, e.g., say (with its variant let's say), such as, like and as. Using the OED and the MED, their earliest occurrences in the language have been traced. With some exceptions, the majority of these forms are recorded for the first time in the OED in the EModE period. As is the earliest marker recorded (early 13th century), whereas included, not attested in the OED until the mid-18th century, is the last of the forms analysed here to acquire an exemplifying function. The EM par exemple is also occasionally used in English, although it is not particularly productive. In previous stages of the language, other EMs were also available to introduce examples. Thus, the noun example could be used in a wide range of phrases, including example of grace, verbi gratia example, ensample, ensample as thus and ensample why. Other obsolete EMs include to bisne, as namely, for the purpose and (as) suppose.

In this paper, a classification of PDE EMs has been proposed on the basis of various parameters. From a semantic point of view, EMs have been classified in four groups taking into account the degree of emphasis added by the EM to the example which it introduces. From less to more emphatic, these groups are: neutral EMs (for example, for instance, e.g.), hypothetical EMs (say), comparative EMs (such as, as, like) and focalising EMs (including, included). This latter group seems to be half way between exemplification and particularisation: such EMs emphasise the example which they introduce, but not to the same extent that particularisers do. Comparative EMs tend to introduce an integrated EE, whereas the remaining EMs occur in non-integrated constructions. If we look at the formal vs. informal character of the EMs, e.g. is clearly formal, whereas for instance and, especially, like are informal. The other EMs considered here are neither formal nor informal.

EMs can also be classified according to the position they occupy in relation to the EE. Thus, whereas some EMs can only appear in P1, that is, before the EE (including, such as, like, e.g., as), others exclusively occur in P3, that is, after the EE ( included). Other EMs are rather flexible as regards position: for example, for instance and, to a lesser extent say, can occur in P1, P3 or in P2, that is, in the middle of the EE, isolating and emphasising a part of it.

Finally, two EMs can sometimes co-occur in the same exemplifying sequence. In all the attested combinations of EMs, the most emphatic form comes first, and is followed by a more neutral form. The main reason for such arrangement has to do with the fact that by adding a second neutral marker, the connotation of emphasis conveyed by the first item may be cancelled. If the second EM is say, it adds a certain nuance of uncertainty to the EE. Moreover, those markers which are more emphatic have a tighter bond with the GE, and they may introduce an integrated EE. As such, they have to occur side by side with the EE. In none of these combinations are the EMs linked by conjunctions, but some examples are also found where such as and like are coordinated with including (such as and including, like and including). The addition of and including in these sequences may be a strategy followed by the speaker/writer to make clear that such as and like do not have a comparative value in the examples at issue, but rather an exemplifying one. The use of as in combination with other EMs was especially noticeable in previous stages of the language, when it was probably used to reinforce emerging EMs which could be potentially ambiguous.

One of the major conclusions to be drawn from this paper is how fuzzy the boundaries between appositional types are: similar EMs may introduce different types of appositives, and the very same EM may be used in different appositional types at different points in time over the course of the history of the language. Thus, for example, say is a marker of exemplification when it occurs on its own, but a marker of equivalence in the phrase that is to say. On similar lines, namely is currently used as a marker of equivalence, but its origin was that of a marker of particularisation and for some time could also introduce examples when used in the sequence as namely. Finally, including and included are categorised as markers of exemplification by Quirk et al. (1985), but as particularisers by Meyer (1992).

This study has also pointed to the potential existence of some forms which might currently be in the process of acquiring an exemplifying function, namely i.e. and thus. Future research might usefully analyse these forms in further corpus samples.


(1) For more information on the neutral EMs for example and for instance in PDE, see Rodriguez-Abruneiras (2017).

(2) For more information on the focalising EMs including and included in PDE, see Rodriguez-Abruneiras (2017).

(3.) The label pleonastic is not used in this paper because none of the EMs that cooccur are considered to be redundant as they convey specific nuances of meaning to the sequence.

Works Cited

BARBER, Charles. 1976. Early Modern English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh U.P

BAUGH, Albert Croll and Thomas CABLE. (1951) 1993. A History of the English Language. London: Routledge.

BERNSTEIN, Theodore Menline. 1971. Miss This-tlebottom's Hobgoblins. The Careful Writer's Guide to the Taboos, Bugbears, and Outmoded Rules of English Usage. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.

BIBER, Douglas, Stig JOHANSSON, Geoffrey LEECH, Susan CONRAD and Edward FINEGAN. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Essex: Longman.

BROSIUS, Hans Bernd and Anke BATHELT. 1994. "The Utility of Exemplars in Persuasive Communications'.' Communication Research 21: 48-78.

BURCHFIELD, Robert William. (1926) 1998. The New Fowler's Modern English Usage. Oxford: Oxford U.P

CARTER, Ronald, Michael MCCARTHY, Geraldine MARK and Anne O'KEEFFE. 2011. English Grammar Today. Cambridge: Cambridge U.P.

DAILEY-O'CAIN, Jennifer. 2000. "The Sociolinguistic Distribution of and Attitudes toward Focuser like and Quotative like". Journal of Sociolinguistics 4 (1): 60-80.

D'ARCY, Alexandra. 2006. "Lexical Replacement and the Like(s)'. American Speech 81: 339-357.

D'ARCY, Alexandra. 2007. "Like and Language Ideology: Disentangling Fact from Fiction' American Speech 82: 386-419.

FERNANDEZ-BERNARDEZ, Cristina. 1994-1995. "Marcadores textuales de 'ejemplificacion' textual' Estudios de Linguistica 10: 103-144.

FOLLETT, Wilson. 1966. Modern American Usage. A Guide. NewYork: Hill and Wang.

FOWLER, Henry Watson. 1926. A Dictionary of Modern English Usage. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

FREEMAN, Morton S. 1990. The Wordwatcher's Guide to Good Writing and Grammar. Ohio: Writer's Digest Books.

FRY, Edward Bernard, Jacqueline E. KRESS and Dona Lee FOUNTOUKIDIS. (1984) 2006. The Reading Teacher's Book of Lists. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

GATTO, Maristella. 2014. The Web as a Corpus. Theory and Practice. London/New York: Bloomsbury.

GIBSON, Rhonda and Dolf ZILLMANN. 1994. "Exaggerated versus Representative Exemplification in News Reports: Perception of Issues and Personal Consequences' Communication Research 21: 603-624.

GloWbE: Corpus of Global Web-Based English. <>. Accessed March 30, 2017.

HOFFMANN, Sebastian. 2004. "Using the OED Quotations Database as a Corpus: A Linguistic Appraisal" ICAME Journal 28: 17-30.

HUNDT, Marianne, Nadja NESSELHAUF and Carolin BIEWER (eds.) 2007. Corpus Linguistics and the Web. Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi.

HYLAND, Ken. 2007. "Applying a Gloss: Exemplifying and Reformulating in Academia Discourse' Applied Linguistics 28 (2): 266-285.

IYEIRI,Yoko, Michiko YAGUCHI and Hiroko OKABE. 2005. "Gender and Style: The Discourse Particle like in the Corpus of Spoken Professional American English'. English Corpus Studies 12: 37-51.

KILPATRICK, James Jackson. 1984. The Writer's Art. Missouri: Andrews McMeel Publishing LLC.

LISCHINSKY, Alon. 2008. "Examples as Persuasive Argument in Popular Management Literature'. Discourse and Communication 2: 243-269.

LOPEZ-COUSO, Maria Jose. 2016. "Continuing the Dialogue between Corpus Linguistics and Grammaticalisation Theory: Three Case Studies'. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 12: 7-29.

LOPEZ-Couso, Maria Jose and Belen MENDEZ-NAYA. 2012. "On the Use of as if, as though and like in Present-day English Complementation Structures" Journal of English Linguistics 40 (2): 172-195.

LOPEZ-Couso, Maria Jose and Belen MENDEZ-NAYA. 2014. "From Clause to Pragmatic Marker: A Study of the Development of Like-parentheticals in American English" Journal of Historical Pragmatics 15 (1): 66-91.

MED: Middle English Dictionary. <>. Accessed March 30, 2017.

MEEHAN, Teresa. 1991. "It's like, 'What's Happening in the Evolution of like?': A Theory of Grammaticalization" Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics 16: 37-51.

MEYER, Charles. F 1992. Apposition in Contemporary English. Cambridge: Cambridge U.P

MIURA, Ayumi. 2013. "Namely and Other Particularisers in Chaucer's English" In Nakao, Yoshiyuki and Yoko lyeiri (eds.) Chaucer's Language: Cognitive Perspectives. Osaka: Osaka Books: 99-124.

NEVALAiNEN,Terttu. 1999. "Early Modern English Lexis and Semantics" In Lass, Roger (ed.) The Cambridge History of the English Language, Vol. III: 1476-1776. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 332-458.

OED: Oxford English Dictionary. <>. Accessed March 30, 2017.

Oxford Dictionaries Pro. <>. Accessed March 30, 2017.

PAHTA, Paivi and Saara NEVANLINNA. 2001. "On Markers of Expository Apposition" NOWELE 39: 3-51.

PAQUOT, Magali. 2007. "Towards a Productively-oriented Academic Word List" In Walinski, Jacek, Krzysztof Kredens and Stanistaw GoZdZ-Roszkowski (eds.) Lodz Studies in Language Vol. 13: Corpora and ICT in Language Studies. PALC 2005. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang: 127-140.

PARTINGTON, Alan. 2015. "Evaluative prosody" In Aijmer, Karin and Christoph Ruhlemann (eds.) Corpus Pragmatics. A Handbook. Cambridge: Cambridge U.P: 279-303.

PERRY, Stephen D. and William J. GONZENBACH. 1997. "Effects of News Exemplification Extended: Considerations of Controversiality and Perceived Future Opinion'.' Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 41 (2): 229244.

PETERS, Pam. 2004. The Cambridge Guide to English Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge U.P

QUIRK, Randolph, Sidney GREENBAUM, Geoffrey LEECH and Jan SVARTVIK. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.

RODRIGUEZ-ABRUNEIRAS, Paula. 2017. "A formal and functional approach to exemplifying markers in recent and present-day British and American English" Manuscript submitted for publication.

ROMAINE, Suzanne and Deborah LANGE. 1991. "The Use of like as a Marker of Reported Speech and Thought: A Case of Grammaticalization in Progress" American Speech 66 (3): 227-279.

The Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary. (2003) 2008. Cambridge: Cambridge U.P

The Chicago Manual of Style. (1906) 1982. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.

The Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English. (1978) 2009. Pearson Longman.

ZILLMANN, Dolf and Hans-Bernd BROSIUS. 2000. Exemplification in Communication. The Influence of Case Reports on the Perception of Issues. NewYork/London: Routledge.


Universidad de Valencia

Received: 1 April 2017

Accepted: 12 July 2017
COPYRIGHT 2017 Prensas Universitarias de Zaragoza
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2017 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Rodriguez-Abruneiras, Paula
Publication:Miscelanea: A Journal of English and American Studies
Date:Jan 1, 2017

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2021 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters