Semantic preference and prosody of the ‘aftermath of N’ construction: A corpus-based investigation

Jarosław  Wiliński

doi:10.31648/pj.12292

Semantic preference and prosody of the ‘aftermath of N’ construction: A corpus-based investigation

Jarosław Wiliński

Uniwersytet w Siedlcach
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3136-6529

DOI: https://doi.org/10.31648/pj.12292

Abstract

This article examines the ‘aftermath of N’ construction using usage-based construction grammar along with concepts such as semantic preference and prosody. Based on data from the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA) and employing a quantitative corpus-based approach, the author identifies the discourse prosody of this construction and its semantic preference for specific categories of nouns. The study also establishes the structural, semantic, pragmatic, distributional, and discourse-functional properties of the construction while identifying the nouns most closely associated with it. The results indicate that the construction in question primarily exhibits a negative semantic prosody and a marked semantic preference for nouns denoting violent, catastrophic, or emotionally charged events. Thus, it functions as a discursive tool for reflecting on the consequences of impactful events. However, the corpus evidence also reveals that when the construction occurs with neutral or positive nouns (e.g., visit, meeting, or success), particularly in contexts where a logical order or sequence of events is more significant than an evaluative stance, its usual negative semantic prosody is weakened or neutralized. The phrase no longer evokes the negative connotations associated with disasters or crises. Rather, it fulfils the function of a temporal and causal marker, denoting simply ‘after/following’.

Keywords:

construction, semantic preference, prosody, COCA, corpus-based analysis

References

Barlow M., Kemmer S. (eds) (2000): Usage-Based Models of Language. Chicago. Google Scholar

Bednarek M. (2008): Semantic preference and semantic prosody re-examined. “Corpus Linguistic and Linguistic Theory” 4, pp. 119–139.
Crossref Google Scholar

Bublitz W. (1995): Semantic prosody and cohesive company: somewhat predictable. “General and Theoretical Papers” 347. Duisburg, pp. 1–23. Google Scholar

Bybee J., Beckner C. (2010): Usage-based theory. [In:] The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis. B. Heine, H. Narrog (eds). Oxford, pp. 827–855.
Crossref Google Scholar

Hunston S. (2002): Corpora in Applied Linguistics. Cambridge.
Crossref Google Scholar

Liu W. (2020): A corpus-based study of semantic prosody and semantic preference of ‘seem’. “Open Journal of Social Sciences” 8, pp. 282–291.
Crossref Google Scholar

O’Halloran K.A. (2007): Critical discourse analysis and the corpus-informed interpretation of metaphor at the register level. “Applied Linguistics” 28, pp. 1–24.
Crossref Google Scholar

Partington A. (1998): Patterns and Meaning. Using Corpora for English Language Research and Teaching. Amsterdam–Philadelphia.
Crossref Google Scholar

Partington A. (2004): Utterly content in each other’s company. Semantic prosody and semantic preference. “International Journal of Corpus Linguistics” 9, pp. 131–156.
Crossref Google Scholar

Perek F. (2023): Construction grammar and usage-based theory. [In:] The Handbook of Usage-Based Linguistics. M. Diaz-Campos, S. Balasch (eds). Hoboken–NJ, pp. 215–232.
Crossref Google Scholar

Schmid H.-J. (2000): English Abstract Nouns as Conceptual Shells. From Corpus to Cognition. Berlin–New York.
Crossref Google Scholar

Schmid H.-J. (2016): Entrenchment and the Psychology of Language Learning: How We Reorganize and Adapt Linguistic Knowledge. Berlin–Boston.
Crossref Google Scholar

Sinclair J. (1990): Collins Cobuild English Grammar. London. Google Scholar

Sinclair J. (2004a): The lexical item. [In:] Trust the Text. Language, Corpus and Discourse. J. Sinclair (ed.). London–New York, pp. 131–148. Google Scholar

Sinclair J. (2004b): The search for units of meaning. [In:] Trust the Text. Language, Corpus and Discourse. J. Sinclair (ed.). London–New York, pp. 24–48.
Crossref Google Scholar

Stewart D. (2010): Semantic Prosody: A Critical Evaluation. London–New York.
Crossref Google Scholar

Stubbs M. (1995): Collocations and semantic profiles: on the cause of the trouble with quantitative studies. “Functions of Language” 2, pp. 23–55.
Crossref Google Scholar

Stubbs M. (2001): Texts, corpora, and problems of interpretation: a response to Widdowson. “Applied Linguistics” 22, pp. 149–172.
Crossref Google Scholar

Whitsitt S. (2005): A critique of the concept of semantic prosody. “International Journal of Corpus Linguistics” 10, pp. 283–305.
Crossref Google Scholar

Download

Published

2026-03-31

Cited by

Wiliński, J. . (2026). Semantic preference and prosody of the ‘aftermath of N’ construction: A corpus-based investigation. Papers in Linguistics, 28(1), 257–274. https://doi.org/10.31648/pj.12292