Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-6grmk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-05T09:30:11.109Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Be like and the Constant Rate Effect: from the bottom to the top of the S-curve

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 April 2020

MATT HUNT GARDNER
Affiliation:
Quantitative Lexicology and Variational Linguistics (QLVL), Linguistics Research Unit, KU Leuven, Blijde-Inkomststraat 21, Box 3308, 3000 Leuven, Belgium matt.gardner@kuleuven.be
DEREK DENIS
Affiliation:
Department of Language Studies, University of Toronto Mississauga, Maanjiwe nendamowinan 4162, 3359 Mississauga Road, Mississauga ON L5L 1C6 Canada derek.denis@utoronto.ca
MARISA BROOK
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, University of Toronto, Sidney Smith Hall, Room 4055, 100 St George Street, Toronto ON M5S 3G3, Canada marisa.brook@utoronto.ca
SALI A. TAGLIAMONTE
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, University of Toronto, Sidney Smith Hall, Room 4075, 100 St George Street, Toronto ON M5S 3G3, Canada sali.tagliamonte@utoronto.ca
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The be like quotative emerged rapidly around the English-speaking world and has quickly saturated the quotative systems of young speakers in multiple countries. We study be like (and its covariants) in two communities – Toronto, Canada, and York, United Kingdom – in apparent time and at two separate points in real time. We trace the apparent-time trajectory of be like and its covariants from inception to saturation. We take advantage of the prodigious size of our dataset to examine understudied aspects of the linguistic factors that condition quotative variation. Building on earlier suggestions (Cukor-Avila 2002; Durham et al. 2012) that be like might show patterning over time consistent with the Constant Rate Effect (or CRE, Kroch 1989), we argue that the CRE does indeed apply to the rise of be like, but needs to be handled with care. Logistic modelling assumes that the top of the S-curve is located at 100 per cent of a given variable context. In the case of be like, the saturation point is nearer 75–85 per cent, with minor variants retaining small semantic footholds in the system. In conjunction with our analysis, we suggest how to adapt the predictions of the CRE to changes likely to lead to saturation but not categorical use.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020 Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Table 1. Sources of data for the present study; total number of quotative tokens in each; prior studies of be like where relevant

Figure 1

Table 2. Commonly attested factors governing be like use

Figure 2

Table 3. Number of extracted tokens of each attested quotative verb across all Toronto and York data, with percentage of total data per city and year of birth of oldest user indicated. Verbs representing less than 0.1 per cent of data grouped

Figure 3

Figure 1. Distribution of quotatives in apparent and real time in Toronto, Canada, and York, UK

Figure 4

Figure 2. Conditional inference recursive partitioning tree: be like in Toronto, Canada. Era 1 speakers born 1916–93; Era 2 Speakers born 1982–99

Figure 5

Figure 3. Conditional inference recursive partitioning tree: be like in York, UK. Era 1 speakers born 1905–89; Era 2 speakers born 1982–99

Figure 6

Figure 4. Percentage of be like over year of birth/era, by content of the quotation in Toronto and York

Figure 7

Figure 5. Percentage of data by content of the quotation (grey), percentage of data by content of the quotation with be like quotative (black)

Figure 8

Figure 6. Percentage of data by content of the quotation (grey), percentage of data by content of the quotation with be like quotative (black)

Figure 9

Figure 7. Percentage of be like over year of birth/era, by grammatical person of the subject in Toronto and York (see footnote 12)

Figure 10

Figure 8. Percentage of data by grammatical person of the subject (grey), percentage of data by grammatical person of the subject with be like quotative (black)

Figure 11

Figure 9. Percentage of data by grammatical person of the subject (grey), percentage of data by grammatical person of the subject with be like quotative (black)

Figure 12

Figure 10. Percentage of be like over year of birth/era, tense/temporal reference in Toronto and York (see footnote 12)

Figure 13

Figure 11. Percentage of data by tense/temporal reference (grey), percentage of data by tense/temporal reference with be like quotative (black)

Figure 14

Figure 12. Percentage of data by tense/temporal reference (grey), percentage of data by tense/temporal reference with be like quotative (black)

Figure 15

Table 4. Number of different tense/temporal reference constructions in Toronto and York, with number/proportion of tokens occurring with be like and year of birth of oldest be like user for each construction indicated

Figure 16

Table 5. Distribution of quotative be like by tense/temporal reference for two cohorts

Figure 17

Table 6. Toronto – mixed-effects logistic regression testing the fixed effects of Content of the Quotation, Grammatical Person of the Subject, Tense/Temporal Reference and Sex; fixed interactions between Year of Birth and Content of the Quotation, Grammatical Person of the Subject and Tense/Temporal Reference; and a random intercept of Speaker on the realization of quotative be like

Figure 18

Table 7. York – mixed-effects logistic regression testing the fixed effects of Content of the Quotation, Grammatical Person of the Subject, Tense/Temporal Reference and Sex; fixed interactions between Year of Birth and Content of the Quotation, Grammatical Person of the Subject and Tense/Temporal Reference; and a random intercept of Speaker on the realization of quotative be like

Figure 19

Figure 13. Saturation mismodelling: simulated data across three contexts (A, B and C) with a logistic curve (black) compressed to an 80 per cent endpoint of the S-curve, and logistic curves (grey) set to 100 per cent for comparison

Figure 20

Table A1. Toronto – mixed-effects logistic regression testing the fixed effects of Content of the Quotation, Grammatical Person of the Subject, Tense/Temporal Reference and Sex and a random intercept of Speaker on the realization of quotative be like

Figure 21

Table A2. Toronto – mixed-effects logistic regression testing the fixed effects of Content of the Quotation, Grammatical Person of the Subject, Tense/Temporal Reference and Sex and a random intercept of Speaker on the realization of quotative be like

Figure 22

Table A3. Toronto – mixed-effects logistic regression testing the fixed effects of Content of the Quotation, Grammatical Person of the Subject, Tense/Temporal Reference and Sex and a random intercept of Speaker on the realization of quotative be like

Figure 23

Table A4. York – mixed-effects logistic regression testing the fixed effects of Content of the Quotation, Grammatical Person of the Subject, Tense/Temporal Reference and Sex and a random intercept of Speaker on the realization of quotative be like

Figure 24

Table A5. York – Mixed-Effects logistic regression testing the fixed effects of Content of the Quotation, Grammatical Person of the Subject, Tense/Temporal Reference and Sex and a random intercept of Speaker on the realization of quotative be like

Figure 25

Table A6. York – mixed-effects logistic regression testing the fixed effects of Content of the Quotation, Grammatical Person of the Subject, Tense/Temporal Reference and Sex and a random intercept of Speaker on the realization of quotative be like