An Alternative Analysis of the English Get-Past Participle Constructions

Abstract

The article reexamines the status of the so called get-passives in English. The term “ get-passive” is often used to refer to constructions with the verb get and the past participle. The authors claim that this construction involves more heterogeneous types with different semantic and structural properties and that the term passive is misleading, especially when the distinction is blurred. Authors of university grammars, such as Huddleston and Pullum, Quirk et al., and Huddleston, distinguish between verbal and adjectival get-passives comparing them to be-passives. The authors of this article argue that such classification is oversimplified because it lumps together two distinctive types of diathesis, middle and passive voice. Namely, they claim that get+past participle ( get+pp) constructions are best described as a diathesis continuum from active to passive poles, covering a range of events in which the active role of the subject is gradually diminished. A comparative analysis with Macedonian and Greek is included to show that the equivalents of get+pp constructions are not all passive and copular constructions. They also include active get+pp constructions, where the verb get is an inchoative or decausative marker. The article focuses on these “nonpassive” get+ pp constructions and attempts to establish a semantic link among the different types as well as between them and the passive get-constructions.