15.3177, Sum: Use of MUCH

[LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-15-3177. Fri Nov 12 2004. ISSN: 1068 - 4875.

Subject: 15.3177, Sum: Use of MUCH

Moderators: Anthony Aristar, Wayne State U <aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Aristar-Dry, Eastern Michigan U <hdry at linguistlist.org>

Reviews (reviews at linguistlist.org)
        Sheila Collberg, U of Arizona
        Terry Langendoen, U of Arizona

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org/

The LINGUIST List is funded by Eastern Michigan University, Wayne
State University, and donations from subscribers and publishers.

Editor for this issue: Jessica Boynton <jessica at linguistlist.org>
================================================================

To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form at
http://linguistlist.org/LL/posttolinguist.html.


===========================Directory==============================

1)
Date: 12-Nov-2004
From: Agneta M-L Svalberg < amls2 at leicester.ac.uk >
Subject: Use of MUCH



-------------------------Message 1 ----------------------------------
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 12:09:32
From: Agneta M-L Svalberg < amls2 at leicester.ac.uk >
Subject: Use of MUCH


Regarding query http://www.linguistlist.org/issues/15/15-1352.html

Use of MUCH

In April this year I posted a query about the use of 'much' which had
originated among our MA students. Thank you to those who took the time to
respond (Charley Rowe, Alfredo Lescano, Harold Shiffman, Bruce Despain,
Mandy Simons - thanks! - hope I haven't left anybody out). I went on study
leave shortly afterwards and so apologies for not posting a
summary/conclusions earlier.

Below I will draw on the feedback I received (responsibility for
shortcomings my own), but  I will also make some further suggestions. I
will limit the discussion to 'much' when it premodifies a (non-count/mass)
noun. The question was why 'much' seemed more or less likely in particular
collocations and contexts.

'There is much happiness to be found in living a simple life' is ok, but
'There is much salt on the floor' seems odd.

The general feeling seems to be that 'much' is
 - common in the collocation 'not much'
 - and in interrogatives.
In affirmative, declarative contexts it is
- used more frequently with abstract than concrete nouns
- more literary/formal/old fashioned than alternative expressions (e.g. 'a
lot of')

Bruce Despain was of the view that 'much' is somewhat more acceptable in
generalizations than when we speak of concrete or specific amounts and that
it seems to collocate well with 'be found' .

However, one can almost always find counter examples to any of the above,
and many examples although decidedly odd are possible. (?There is much salt
below the surface. ?*There is much salt on the floor.) (There is much
happiness to be found in a simple life. ?There is much salt to be found...)

Thinking about this, it seems to me that there are a couple of general
principles at work which guide the speaker's choice. I have attempted to
formulate them as follows:

Iconicity Principle 1: Because of its frequent lack of prominence 'much' is
a less satisfactory realization of the meaning 'a great quantity' than more
prominent alternatives.

(Its frequent lack of prominence is due to its brevity and a tendency to
sit next to a more heavily stressed syllable. More prominent alternatives
are words/expressions containing a stressed component and material
separating it off from a following stressed syllable, e.g. 'a lot of', 'a
great deal of'.)

(Note that stress in 'too much' makes this expression more prominent and
thus  a more 'satisfying' expression of quantity.)

Iconicity Principle 2: The mismatch (Iconicity 1) is exarcerbated when the
meaning 'a great quantity' is asserted, i.e. in affirmative statements.

The idea is that these principles would affect the speaker's choice of
realization and might tip the balance in favour of other alternatives, such
as 'a lot of' , 'a great deal' and so on.

As the iconicity principles refer to spoken language, they would carry less
weight in the written form and more weight when the speaker/language user
wished to be more subjective/personal. This might explain the greater
acceptability of 'much' in formal or literary contexts.

If anybody has any thoughts on this, I'd be interested to hear from you!

I have added a few more examples below.

Agneta
Agneta M-L Svalberg
CELTEAL - School of Education
University of Leicester


There is not much salt in this dressing.

?There is much salt in this dressing.

?I put much salt in this dressing.

Is there much salt in this dressing?

How much salt is there in this dressing?

?Much salt was added to the dressing.

Much salt has been wasted in an effort to ward of evil.

There is not much happiness to be found in that place.

?There is much happiness to be found in that place.

I found much happiness in that place.

Is there much happiness to be found in that place?

How much happiness is to be found in that place?

Much happiness can be found in that place.


Agneta M-L Svalberg (Dr)
CELTEAL/ School of Education
University of Leicester
21 University Road
Leicester LE1 7RF
UK

Linguistic Field(s): Pragmatics; Semantics

Subject Language(s): English (Language Code: ENG)




-----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-15-3177