2.1 Slash and and

One use of slash is similar to the intersective use of and. The coordinator and, when coordinating two nouns, is sometimes ambiguous between an intersective reading and a collective reading (Bergmann Reference Bergmann1982). The intersective reading of and, seen in (23), refers to a single individual. The collective reading, seen in (24), refers to multiple individuals.

1. (23) Intersective and = denotes one individual

   1. (a) That liar and cheat cannot be trusted. (Champollion Reference Champollion2016)

   2. (b) My friend and colleague always sang too loudly. (Heycock & Zamparelli Reference Heycock and Zamparelli2005)

2. (24) Collective and = denotes multiple individuals

   1. (a) The farmer and X-ray technician both claimed the right to asylum.

   2. (b) My mom and dad were always shouting at each other. (Heycock & Zamparelli Reference Heycock and Zamparelli2005)

Here, slash has only an intersective meaning, and can denote only one and the same individual.

1. (25) Intersective slash = denotes one individual

   1. (a) That liar slash cheat cannot be trusted.

   2. (b) My friend slash colleague always sang too loudly.

2. (26) Collective slash = denotes multiple individuals

   1. (a) * The farmer slash X-ray technician both claimed the right to asylum.

   2. (b) * My mom slash dad were always shouting at each other.

Many observed examples of slash, in both corpora and media, denote only a single individual, supporting the fact that slash is intersective.

1. (27) When a mysterious cowboy slash Santa says, ‘Come with me’, you climb on that horse and ride. (Bob's Burgers, season 5, episode 6)

2. (28) This is more an extended jingle jam slash demo reel. (Bob's Burgers, season 3, episode 8)

3. (29) This is the kitchen slash washroom.

Renner (Reference Renner2008) calls this property ‘homoreferentiality’, where the ‘denotata are fused’ (in compounds). This is the intersective use of slash.

2.2 Slash and cum

The pattern of use of the Latin connective cum is similar to slash. Latin cum, which originally meant ‘with’, is used in modern formal English to indicate two roles that one individual is fulfilling (Lewis & Short Reference Lewis and Short1879). A classic use is to link multiple jobs that one person has, as in (30a). There are also examples of cum with adjectives (30b–c) and generic places (30d), as well as being fossilized in toponyms (30e).

1. (30)

   1. (a) In the winter months, I moonlight as a bartender cum ski instructor.

   2. (b) Sites such as this show the full power of the Internet as a propaganda medium cum travel service cum organizing tool. Oh, and nightlife directory. (David Sachs, ‘Let them eat bits’, American Spectator, 34(8) (2001), 78)

   3. (c) The fervent mediaevalism developed a philosophic cum economic tinge. (OED)

   4. (d) The atmosphere of laboratory-cum-workshop. . . (OED)

   5. (e) Prestwich-cum-Oldham was an important place in present-day Lancashire, England.

In all examples in (30), except for the place names, cum can be replaced by slash. In addition, Renner (Reference Renner2013: 64) notes that cum can only be used if it is repeated between all conjuncts (driver-cum-waiter-cum-porter, but not *driver-waiter-cum-porter), a property that slash also has (driver-slash-waiter-slash-porter, but not *driver-waiter-slash-porter). The meaning and distribution of slash and cum do overlap.

Still, cum differs from slash in at least three ways. First, I perceive a significant register difference between the two. Cum is unmarked only in relatively formal contexts, and it's nearly obsolete in contemporary, casual conversation. Slash is very common in informal conversation, and as shown by the many examples we have seen so far, appears in other domains like news reporting and published media, indicating its widespread acceptance. Second, cum sometimes has an additional ‘transformative’ component, meaning ‘turned-into’ or ‘became’. Compare this pair of sentences:

1. (31)

   1. (a) Ronald Reagan is the only actor cum President of the United States.

   2. (b) Ronald Reagan is the only actor slash President of the United States.

In (31), cum refers to Ronald Reagan's unique status of being an actor who later became President. The slash-alternative does not have this meaning (moreover, it sounds false in the real world – at no time was Reagan simultaneously an actor and President). The latter carries no meaning of a temporal relation between the two positions; they are held simultaneously. Third, Renner (Reference Renner2013: 64) notes cum is limited to combining nouns or adjectives only, while verbal and adverbial combinations are unattested. Slash does not have these restrictions, and can combine all four of these categories.

2.3 Slash and compounds

The meaning and distribution of coordinative compounds (see Olsen Reference Olsen, Booij and van Marle2000, Reference Olsen, Meulen and Abraham2004; see also appositional compounds in Bauer Reference Bauer2008) is similar to that of slash.Footnote ³ A typical noun–noun compound links two professions much like Latin cum.

1. (32)

   1. (a) The poet–translator was present at the lecture.

   2. (b) I consulted with my bartender–psychologist.

There are several differences in the distribution and use of slash compared to coordinative compounds. Olsen (Reference Olsen, Booij and van Marle2000) notes that compounds grow unwieldy the more complex they are (? ? film–studio–mogul–television–network–owner). Slash does not degrade with complexity or length, and there are some attested long examples including slash which read easily (This is more of an extended jingle jam slash demo reel). Olsen (Reference Olsen, Meulen and Abraham2004) observes that compounds can express kinship and profession simultaneously (his engineer-father). This sounds unusual with slash (? his engineer slash father). Compounds can express a ‘between’ relationship for the component parts (lawyer–client relationship). Slash cannot express this ‘between’ relationship (? lawyer slash client relationship). Compounds can define a collection or companionship (mother–daughter duo). This is strictly unavailable with slash (*mother slash daughter duo). Lastly, compounds and slash involve different categories. Compounds and slash both productively join nouns. Compounds can be created with adjectives (bitter-sweet, red-brown) and, to a very limited extent, verbs (drop-kick is one candidate) (Bauer Reference Bauer2010: 215). Slash has no such restriction and freely coordinates adjectives, verbs, and some functional categories and phrases.

Slash and coordinative compounds are close but not identical in meaning. The sentence in (33) is adapted from an attested example from COCA. For speakers who can utter sentences like (33), noun–noun compounds and slash-coordination are not equivalent.

1. (33) I'm not a student-athlete, I'm a student slash athlete.Footnote ⁴

As brought to my attention by one of the reviewers, the comparison between student-athlete and student slash athlete demonstrates a difference between morphological and syntactic coordination. Student-athlete is a compound formed by morphological coordination. A compound denotes a hyponym of its head – a student-athlete is a specific type of athlete. Student slash athlete is not a word but a construction formed by syntactic coordination. In syntactic coordination, a hyponym is not formed, but two constituents are combined and contribute equally to the meaning of the whole. A student slash athlete functions equally as a student and as an athlete.

This difference in meaning also arises in common expressions like singer-songwriter. A singer-songwriter describes a person who is both a singer and a songwriter, and this person ‘carries out both professions simultaneously’ (Bauer Reference Bauer2010: 204). The expression singer slash songwriter also describes a person who is both a singer and a songwriter, but leaves room for the possibility that the two roles don't necessarily interact.

The particular example singer-songwriter is very frequent, and may be considered a fixed expression, as suggested by one of the reviewers. If we compare less common copulative compounds with slash variants, such as teacher-astronaut, lawyer-novelist, author-cartoonist, developer-architect, plumber-inmate (from Olsen Reference Olsen, Meulen and Abraham2004), the difference persists. Each of these combinations expresses something different when combined with slash. If someone is a teacher-astronaut, she is an astronaut, but happens to teach (most likely on astronautical topics). If someone is a teacher slash astronaut, it is more likely that she is a teacher and an astronaut, acting in full capacities of both at separate, unrelated times.

There is some debate about the status of heads in compounds. The example in (34) suggests that the speaker interprets co-compounds as being left-headed (Bauer Reference Bauer2010: 206).

1. (34) ‘I am a lawyer-musician, not a musician-lawyer,’ he says. ‘My calling is the law.’

Fábregas & Scalise (Reference Fábregas and Scalise2012: 113) argue it is possible to analyze compounds as having two heads. Each component has an equal semantic contribution, and in certain languages each constituent carries inflection. For example, co-compounds in Spanish are marked for plural on both constituents (Fábregas & Scalise Reference Fábregas and Scalise2012: 115):

1. (35) filósofos economistas ‘philosopher-economists’

2. (36) poetas-pintores ‘poet-painters’

However, by the same argument English compounds seem to be right-headed: only the rightmost constituent carries plural marking (Olsen Reference Olsen, Booij and van Marle2000: 293):

1. (37) the writer-directors

2. (38) the attorney-archivists

This turns out to be different for slash-coordination. It is possible to mark the first constituent of slash-coordination with plural (clients slash patients), but this is not possible in compounds (*clients-patients). This is possible if slash is coordination at the syntactic level, since each constituent can be inflected. This is not possible in morphological coordination (i.e. compounding), where such word-internal inflection is not possible in English.

2.4 Slash and orthographic </>

Lexical slash has its origin in the orthographic symbol </>, but they are not equivalent in every case. The (a) sentences use the orthographic </> to indicate a definite disjunction. It is not possible to replace orthographic </> with lexical slash, as in the (b) sentences. The question in (39a) concerns one's spouse, where it is assumed only one of wife or husband applies. The question in (39b) is asking about someone's spouse who is simultaneously a wife and husband, which is not a coherent concept.

1. (39)

   1. (a) What did you find out about your wife/husband only after you got married?

   2. (b) # What did you find out about your wife slash husband only after you got married?

2. (40)

   1. (a) While taking the survey, you should use Chrome/Firefox/Safari.

   2. (b) # While taking the survey, you should use Chrome slash Firefox slash Safari.

3. (41)

   1. (a) Eileen will travel to the conference by air/rail.

   2. (b) # Eileen will travel to the conference by air slash rail.

In these examples, the orthographic </> cannot be pronounced as slash, it is more likely to be read out as or.

Despite these examples, slash can sometimes be used to coordinate alternatives, or to introduce a clarification. The examples in (1), (5), (7), (11), (20), (73) and (75), repeated below, illustrate these additional uses.

1. (42)

   1. (a) NIMBYism slash selfishness

   2. (b) my sister slash anyone else who wants to come

   3. (c) a PhD slash career change

   4. (d) politely slash embarrassedly

   5. (e) entertainment slash education dollar

   6. (f) to tapdance slash sing

   7. (g) you lived slash work here

In my sister slash anyone else who wants to come, slash indicates disjunction, which gives the relevant options to choose from. There is no intersective meaning. In NIMBYism slash selfishness, the second conjunct selfishness is used to clarify the perspective on the issue. In each of the examples in (42), slash has no intersective meaning. We conclude there is a second meaning of slash: a distributive meaning that indicates alternatives or two available perspectives of the same entity or concept.

Slash can also combine proper names and yield this second, distributive meaning. Both and and or easily link proper names.

1. (43) Brian and Katya arrived on time.

2. (44) Brian or Katya arrived on time.

Brian and Katya is a construction that must have a collective interpretation. Brian or Katya has a distributive meaning. Consider the same construction, but with slash:

1. (45) Brian slash Katya arrived on time.

With slash, we obtain the distributive reading, which gives two alternatives or perspectives about a single individual. Imagine that Brian and Katya are separate personas of a stage performer, where both names refer to the same individual. Brian slash Katya can be used to refer to that performer, indicating two sides of that personality. The intersective meaning is unavailable for conceptual reasons. Brian slash Katya does not refer to a single individual simultaneously made up of Brian and Katya. For this same reason, it is not possible to create such a coordinative compound as *Brian–Katya.

These are additional constructed examples showing slash combining proper names. All of the following are examples where one name is a stage persona (Katya, Macklemore, Bono) and the other is a birth name (Brian, Ben, Paul Hewson).

1. (46) Brian slash Katya wore a scandalous red dress that he bought at a consignment store.

2. (47) I have a picture of Macklemore slash Ben's football jersey.

3. (48) This school was given $10,000 from Paul Hewson slash Bono.

In each case, slash cannot be substituted by and and retain the same meaning. Macklemore and Ben is not equivalent to Macklemore slash Ben. It is also not possible to create coordinative compounds for these name combinations (*Macklemore–Ben, *Paul Hewson–Bono).

A reviewer makes the interesting observation that blends like Brangelina appear to express what the coordinative compound *Brad–Angelina would denote if it were possible: the meaning of a single individual made of two parts. Brangelina denotes a single individual – in this case a team or couple. *Brad–Angelina would in principle denote the same thing, but blends are preferred for expressing this concept. Such compounds are indeed possible with nonhuman mergers, for example AT&T–TimeWarner merger (Olsen Reference Olsen, Booij and van Marle2000: 299). Slash is unavailable for both of these cases. *Brad slash Angelina would denote alternatives for a single individual, as in cross-dressing. *AT&T slash Timewarner is not possible because slash does not express fusing two parts into a whole, as in a merger.

2.5 Interim summary

To summarize this section, slash looks similar to other connective elements or processes in English, such as and, cum, compounding and orthographic </>, but I have described ways that the distribution and use of slash differ from each of these. In comparing slash to these connectives, we have discovered two distinct meanings of slash: the first is an intersective meaning (rapper slash actress), and the second is a distributive meaning indicating alternatives or perspectives of a single entity or concept (NIMBYism slash selfishness, Brian slash Katya).

4.1 Category restriction

In this section I describe the categories we see flanking slash. I work from the bottom (N) up through the top of the clause structure (CP). Slash in many examples we've seen so far simply coordinates bare nouns (N).

1. (65) Just a sip of beer. . . that's what they serve these days at the home slash beach slash pub. (Mike Birbiglia. My Girlfriend's Boyfriend)

2. (66) Michael Scott: There are four kinds of business: tourism, food service, railroads, and sales. (pause)

3. Michael Scott: And hospitals slash manufacturing. And air travel. (The Office (US), season 3, episode 16)

4. (67) The patient has a teratoma slash neuroblastoma.

Slash does not coordinate full noun phrases with an article (DP), though.

1. (68) * A doctor slash a lawyer walked in the room.

Nor does it work that well with any pair of determiners (D).

1. (69) * I saw a slash the movie yesterday.

2. (70) * This slash that box should go in the closet.

Adjectives and adverbs readily coordinate with slash.

1. (71) I'm very very happy for you slash jealous.Footnote ⁶

2. (72) Egli declined politely slash embarrassedly.

Slash coordinates bare verbs (V).

1. (73) Tom wants to tapdance slash sing onstage.

There are examples where slash is attested to coordinate verb phrases (VP).

1. (74)

   1. A: What are you doing?

   2. B: Office hours slash watching Olympics.

2. (75) I forgot that you lived slash work here.

Slash coordinates T.

1. (76) Excuse me, who is slash was this guy? (Bob's Burgers, season 3, episode 9)

2. (77) I could slash should help you clean the kitchen, but I'm lazy so I can't slash won't.

Assuming subjects end up in Spec,TP, T’ coordination seems to be the limit, as in (78). Coordination of anything larger seems unwieldy, like the TP in (79).

1. (78) John was cleaning the kitchen slash will be leaving soon.

2. (79) ? John was cleaning the kitchen slash Mary was replacing the carpet.

Finally, C and unambiguous CP (that is, unambiguously not TP) resist co-occurrence with slash.

1. (80) ? I know what slash when John sang.

2. (81) * I know what John sang slash when he did so.

Coordinated wh-words in English are possible in questions like What and when did John sing? (Citko & Gračanin-Yuksek Reference Citko and Gračanin-Yuksek2016: 394). It is also possible to coordinate the CPs with and (I know what John sang and when he did so). This means the restrictions in (80) and (81) are due to slash, rather than a general prohibition against coordinating multiple wh-words in English.

These results are summarized in the table in (82).

1. (82)

   

To sum up these findings, slash is sensitive to the category of the elements it can combine, but in an idiosyncratic way. It is not the case that simply small elements like words are allowed and larger units like phrases are not. Nor is it the case that slash coordinates only nouns or adjectives, as cum does (Renner Reference Renner2013: 64). The attested examples of VP coordination disprove both of these (I am working at home slash conducting meetings all day). There is a rough division between lexical categories, which are allowed to coordinate (N, NP, V, VP) and functional categories, which are not (D, DP, C, CP).

Now I compare slash directly to the syntactic behavior of and and or, and note properties that seem to be shared between the coordinators, and which are not shared. I discuss negation, the Law of Coordination of Likes, the Coordinate Structure Constraint, intensifying iteration, comitative and collective predicates, and relational modifiers.

Under negation, slash is usually interpreted just like and.

1. (83) Alex is not a lawyer or judge. (. . . He is an accountant.)

2. ¬L∧¬J

3. (84) (a) Alex is not a lawyer and judge. (. . . He is ONLY a lawyer.)

4. ¬(L∧J)

   (b) Alex is not a lawyer slash judge. (. . . He is ONLY a (mere) lawyer.)

5. ¬(L∧J)

But there are some examples where distributivity is the more natural reading.

1. (85) When you're not married slash in a relationship, it's incumbent on you to be proud of yourself for things.

2. ¬M∧¬R

The data are inconclusive, but they suggest that slash can be interpreted like either and or or.

The Law of Coordination of Likes (LCL) states that coordinands must be of the same category, or ‘type’ (Williams: Reference Williams1978). For and and or, category identity is too restrictive, as Sag et al. (Reference Sag, Gazdar, Wasow and Weisler1985) show with these and other examples:

1. (86)

   

1. (87)

   

1. (88)

   

Slash generally does not allow these exact kinds of exceptions to the LCL. Coordinands must be the same category, as the (b) examples show.

1. (89)

   

1. (90)

   

1. (91)

   

There is at least one instance where slash appears to join unlike categories, an ADJ and a PP.

1. (92)

   

It is possible to preserve the LCL by analyzing this as coordination of a predicate phrase or general subject complement.Footnote ⁷

Slash also obeys the Coordinate Structure Constraint (Ross Reference Ross1967).

1. (93) The Coordinate Structure Constraint (CSC)

2. In a coordinate structure, no conjunct may be moved, nor may any element contained in a conjunct be moved out of that conjunct. (Ross Reference Ross1967: 161)

Coordinate constructions don't allow such extraction (94), and neither does slash allow such extraction (95).

1. (94)

   1. (a) * Who did you see [_] and [Tim]?

   2. (b) * Who did you see [Tim] and [_]?

   3. (c) * Who did you see both [_] and [_]?

   4. (d) * Which of her books did you find both [[a review of _] and [_]?

2. (95)

   1. (a) * What is Lila a cat slash [_]

   2. (b) * What is Lila a [_] slash [friend]?

   3. (c) * What is John both [_] slash [_]? (A bartender slash ski instructor.)

However, Ross (Reference Ross1967), Goldsmith (Reference Goldsmith1985), Lakoff (Reference Lakoff1986) and others noted that the CSC can be circumvented in certain cases, using the coordinator and, in the (a) examples. These examples are not acceptable with slash, as shown in the (b) sentences.

1. (96)

   1. (a) Here's the whiskey that John [went to the store] and [bought _]. (Ross Reference Ross1967: 168)

   2. (b) * Here's the whiskey that John [went to the store] slash [bought _].

2. (97)

   1. (a) How many lakes can you [pollute _] and [not arouse public furor]? (Goldsmith Reference Goldsmith1985: 213)

   2. (b) * How many lakes can you [pollute _] slash [not arouse public furor]?

It was shown that slash is independently capable of coordinating VPs, so the ungrammaticality of the (b) sentences is not due to the fact that slash cannot coordinate such large structures. Instead, we see that slash remains subject to the CSC, unlike certain types of asymmetric and.

In ordinary coordination, both and and or require the conjuncts to be distinct in meaning.

1. (98) * This year the winter has been surprisingly mild and this year the winter has been surprisingly mild.

2. (99) * John is looking for Lollek and Lollek is being sought by John. (Lang Reference Lang1984: 99)

Yet there are cases of and-conjuncts where the conjuncts are not only semantically non-distinct, but they are identical in form. This construction is a somewhat idiomatic but nevertheless productive use of and, and yields a particular ‘intensifying’ reading (Gleitman Reference Gleitman1965). Slash does not allow this; neither does or.

1. (100)

   1. (a) Garraty walked faster and faster.

   2. (b) * Garraty walked faster or faster.

   3. (c) * Garraty walked faster slash faster.

A key property of slash is that there is no ‘summative’ property of slash that will license collective, reciprocal, or similar predicates. Or behaves the same way; and does not. This follows from the observation in section 2 that slash only combines proper names referring to the same individual.

1. (101) Comitative predicates

   1. (a) James and Maria went to the wedding together.

   2. (b) * James or Maria went to the wedding together.

   3. (c) * James slash Maria went to the wedding together.

2. (102) Collective predicates with proper names

   1. (a) Ethan and Laura met (each other) in semantics class.

   2. (b) * Ethan or Laura met (each other) in semantics class.

   3. (c) * Ethan slash Laura met (each other) in semantics class.

3. (103) Collective predicates with bare nouns

   1. (a) A doctor and lawyer met.

   2. (b) * A doctor or lawyer met.

   3. (c) * A doctor slash lawyer met.

Relational modifiers like same and different are sometimes ambiguous between an internal reading and an external reading. (104a) is ambiguous. One interpretation emphasizes the fact that Zac and Jessica are singing the same song as each other. This is the internal reading. A second interpretation emphasizes the fact that Zac and Jessica are singing the same song as a third person or a previous discourse referent. This is the external reading. (104b–c) do not have internal readings: they cannot be continued with. . .as each other. . ..

1. (104)

   1. (a) Zac and Jessica sang the same song. (external and internal reading)

   2. (b) Zac or Jessica sang the same song. (external only)

   3. (c) Zac slash Jessica sang the same song. (external only)

As we saw before, slash forces the proper names to refer to the same individual, so (104c) is impossible if Zac and Jessica, as might be assumed, are separate individuals. In cases of performers with multiple names, or individuals with split-personality, it may be possible to obtain a variant of (104c) with an internal reading that is true in some remote sense.

1. (105) Brian slash Katya sang the same song.

If Brian and Katya are one and the same individual, and it is possible for a single event to give rise to an internal reading (in other words, if one considers I sang the same song as myself acceptable), then it is possible for him (Brian) to sing the same song as herself (Katya). I find this interpretation difficult, but logically possible given the right scenario.

4.2 Unique behavior of slash

In this section I highlight two behaviors that are unique to slash: obligatory monosyndeton and its interpretation.

Slash does allow more than two coordinands, but unlike and and or, it requires additional instances of slash. It is obligatorily monosyndetic: for N number of conjuncts, there are N−1 instances of slash. In (106) there are 3 conjuncts, and 2 slashes.

1. (106) we're going to get an exclusive look inside the small box off which magician slash contortionist slash performance artist David Blaine is going to step tomorrow for 44 days. (COCA: 2003 SPOK ABC_GMA)

And and or allow this very naturally as well.

1. (107) You are a magician, and contortionist, and performance artist.

2. (108) You are a magician, or contortionist, or performance artist.

3. (109) You are a magician, slash contortionist, slash performance artist.

But and and or allow, for stylistic and/or meaning reasons, ‘all but last’ omission, where all but the last coordinator is dropped, as in (110) and (111). If we attempt this with slash (112) the sentence becomes degraded, and prosody is stilted.

1. (110) You are a magician, contortionist, and performance artist.

2. (111) You are a magician, contortionist, or performance artist.

3. (112) ?? You are a magician, contortionist, slash performance artist.

The sentence in (113) shows us that but has this same property as slash: but cannot be dropped as and and or can in (110) and (111). Note however, but never coordinates more than one conjunct, as in (114).

1. (113) * You are a magician, contortionist, but performance artist.

2. (114) * You are a magician, but contortionist, but performance artist.

Slash is the only coordinator that both can join multiple conjuncts and must appear between each pair of conjuncts.

As noted earlier, and can have either a collective or an intersective interpretation:

1. (115) A cat and dog ran in. (collective only; 2 animals)

2. (116) That liar and cheat was licensed. (intersective)

Or has only a disjunctive reading:

1. (117) A cat or dog ran in. (disjunctive only; 1 animal)

Slash refers to an animal that is somehow both a cat and a dog:

1. (118) A cat slash dog ran in. (intersective only; 1 animal)

This is an additional illustration. While (119) is ambiguous between meeting with two individuals or one, (120) can only mean meeting with one individual:

1. (119) Meeting with your colleague and therapist can be therapeutic. (ambiguous: 2 or 1 persons)

2. (120) Meeting with your colleague slash therapist can be therapeutic. (unambiguous: 1 person)

While and has both the collective and intersective meanings, slash has only the intersective meaning.

Table 1 summarizes the observations.

Table 1. Summary of the observations (+ means the property holds for that coordinator)

In sum, slash syntactically behaves more like or, yet has the semantics of intersective and. It shares few, if any, properties with but. What seems to unify these observations is a constraint on reference: the result of slash-coordination must denote a single, coherent individual.

5.1 Innovation in functional categories

The appearance of slash as a coordinator is unexpected for at least two reasons. First, coordination has long been considered a ‘very’ closed functional category (Zoerner Reference Zoerner1995: 14). Many works on coordination discuss only and and or, possibly but. Some include a few more members in the class: ‘in English. . . there are only five coordinating conjunctions: and, or, but, for, and so’ (Johannessen Reference Johannessen1998: 98). By any estimate the class is small and does not gain new members easily.

Second, there is little precedent for a coordinator to originate from punctuation. Functional categories in general can originate from seemingly any other category, including lexical categories. Conjunctions are reported to come from verbs, nouns, case markers, adpositions, deictics, or even mutated versions of conjunctions themselves. And derives from an Indo-European adverb or locative preposition, one of Ancient Greek anti ‘anti-, opposite’, Classical Latin ante ‘before’, or Sanskrit anti (‘near’ adv.) (OED, second edition, 1989). Or is a reduced form of other, which was itself being used as a conjunction (OED, second edition, 1989). We see that and derives from either an Indo-European preposition or adverb, and or derives from a conjunction. What is unprecedented about slash is that it almost certainly derives from a punctuation symbol, the orthographic slash </>.

5.2 From written to spoken language

I propose that slash has followed this path from written to spoken language:

1. (121) The path of grammaticalization for effable punctuation

   1. 1. Established as punctuation in orthography (written language only)

   2. ↓

   3. 2. Speakers began pronouncing the names of punctuation for emphasis (spoken language)

   4. ↓

   5. 3. Names of punctuation grammaticalized (spoken, written language)

There are a few other very well-attested examples of new members of functional and lexical categories entering the spoken language through orthography. These include period and quote.

1. (122) period / full stop

   1. (a) ‘Esports is the future of competition. Period,’ UCI's Acting Director of Esports Mark Deppe says. (www.engadget.com/2016/09/14/esports-arena-college-uc-irvine-leage-of-legends/?9/15/16)

   2. (b) No. He sent her out to go get a sandwich, period. (COCA: 2015 (150106) Did Princeton grad murder millionaire dad?; Cops try to identify newborn left to die; SPOK: CNN)

   3. (c) There is an official order gone out from the pope that senior Vatican people are not to gossip with the media. Full stop. (COCA: 2005 (20050306) Critique of worldwide media coverage; SPOK: CNN_Intl)

2. (123) quote

   1. (a) they have a new, quote, ‘strategy’ to work with Congress on some things of mutual interest. (COCA: 2015 (150104) Interview with Delaware Senator Chris Coons; SPOK: CBS)

   2. (b) It reads, quote, ‘It appears that I am now being unjustly victimized again.’ (COCA: 2015 Royal sex scandal: Prince Andrew; SPOK: CNN)

Period is interesting because both common names for the mark <.>, period and full stop, have been lexicalized. This further supports the central idea that it is really the names for the punctuation marks that are entering the language. There is some cross-linguistic support for this idea as well. For example, the Russian word tochka (‘period’) has a similar discursive use and function as the English period.

Quote has a number of interesting properties. It can interrupt very small units, like breaking up an ADJ from its N as demonstrated in (123a). It can be used to deride (123a), or to report verbatim language (123b). Quote might also be the only kind of correlative spoken punctuation, with the optional correlate unquote used to delimit the boundaries of the quoted material. These are used where open and closing quotation marks are used in written language.

1. (124) One can not, as war correspondent Michael Herr testifies in dispatches, simply, quote, run the film backwards out of consciousness, unquote. (COCA: 2015 (150120) In the evil hours, a journalist shares his struggle with PTSD; SPOK: NPR)

2. (125) bad topiary is, quote, the senseless torture of shrubs, unquote; (COCA: 2014 (140125) Not my job: how much does a former hedge fund manager know about hedges? SPOK: NPR)

The combined expression quote–unquote can also be uttered entirely before the quotation, as in (126) and (127).

1. (126) The last words in one of his emails was, quote, unquote, ‘You are not getting off that easy.’ (Spoken transcript)

2. (127) ‘That, I think, is much better than being quote/unquote “religious”,’ the crow said. (David Sedaris, Squirrel seeks chipmunk, 2010, p. 78)

This spoken innovation differs from written language, which does not conventionally allow reporting speech that way (*That, I think is much better than being “ ” religious).

Other attested examples of spoken pronunciation include dot dot dot and question mark.

1. (128) mayor west: Well dot dot dot hello! (Family Guy, season 9, episode 15, ‘Brothers & Sisters’; Fox)

2. (129) audience question: Will the Alumni Association hold social events in the coming year?

   presenter: Yes question mark? [All high tone] I'll have to ask our Social Chair about that.

Slash differs from all of these instances (period/full stop, quote–unquote, dot dot dot, question mark) in that its distribution corresponds to an already established syntactic category.

The proposed path of grammaticalization does not admit all types of punctuation. There are some punctuation marks that have never reached step 2, and resist quite strongly being pronounced. All of the following in (130) are seriously anomalous compared to those in (131). These are all highly anomalous utterances in spoken English.

1. (130) Ineffable step 2 punctuation marks

   1. (a) ? Nerzhin shoved his cap farther back dash he was feeling hot dash and rested his head in the fork of the tree again

   2. (b) ? You'll become an indispensable expert exclamation mark

   3. (c) ? They've never given remission here semicolon you know that.

   4. (d) ? So the murderers apostrophe hearts bleed for Russia now, do they?

   5. (e) ?Wasn apostrophe t it you who butchered Russia in 1917?

In contrast, these are all acceptable utterances in spoken English.

1. (131) Attested step 2 punctuation marks

   1. (a) Sport is the opiate of the people period

   2. (b) The prisoner asked quote was it to keep the air clean that not one of the prisoners was smoking? endquote

   3. (c) A Russian Orthodox priest slash warden just happened to walk into the cell

This set of ineffable punctuations in (130) most likely corresponds to the ones that already have phonetic correlates in speech. Commas <,> used to set off items of a list indicate a kind of falling ‘list’ intonation, and pronouncing comma does not provide any additional information, even in emphasis (? Please go to the store and buy pineapples comma seltzer comma and rum). This use of comma is not likely to enter spoken language because its spoken version serves no extra purpose. A reviewer notes that comma can sometimes be pronounced for extra rhetorical effect, such as introducing a dramatic counterpoint (However, comma, the man was not at home when the crime happened). This use of spoken comma does serve an additional purpose and it is readily pronounced.

Emphasis is a likely driving factor behind slash entering spoken language. As brought to my attention by one of the reviewers, a number of attested coordinative compounds are written using the orthographic </>: composer/programmer, actor/winemaker/singer (Olsen Reference Olsen, Booij and van Marle2000: 293, 318). It is plausible that speakers began pronouncing the slash as a way to emphasize or clarify the compound (and eventually reanalyzed it as a syntactic coordinator). This emphatic usage is similar to the widespread emphatic period.

1. (132) ‘In fact, I will never go to the movies with you. . . period.’

It seems that the two meanings of slash could derive from speakers pronouncing the orthographic slash </> as used in two different constructions.Footnote ⁸ The first, intersective meaning of slash could have originated as the emphatic pronunciation of </> in coordinative compounds (bartender/psychologist). The second, distributive meaning of slash could have come from non-intersective uses of </>, such as NIMBYism/selfishness or race/ethnicity. Speakers pronouncing slash in these combinations are expressing not intersection but options and perspectives.

One additional component of this analysis is that the words period, full stop, quote and slash are all homophonous with common words already established in the language. For slash, it is the common verb slash, as in The government won't slash taxes.Footnote ⁹ This is a potential precondition for these punctuation names to enter the language: the name must already be a standard word in order for speakers to bring the punctuation into productive functional use in the language. This would explain why the technical, typographical terms for </>, virgule or solidus, haven't as easily entered the functional lexicon: they aren't common words in the first place.

Lastly, in terms of the timeline, in the traceable history of English orthography, </> actually predates all other marks (including <,> and <.>) in punctuated written texts (Crystal Reference Crystal2015). It is interesting that it did not also enter the spoken language earlier than all others.

5.3 Typological and historical perspective

Although the traditional English coordinators and and or are not category-sensitive, it is not uncommon for world languages to have coordinators with category restrictions (Haspelmath Reference Haspelmath2004: 10). Many languages have different coordinators depending on the syntactic or semantic properties of the conjuncts. No language, however, has unique coordinators for collective and intersective coordination. Slash is potentially an example of the latter. There are languages that make differences along other semantic lines. The closest distinction seems to be in Chechen, which has different conjunctive constructions for when the conjuncts form a conceptual unit and when they form separate entities (e.g. shish-ii stak-ii ‘a bottle and a glass’; waerzha mazh ’a, q'eegash shi bwaerg ’a ‘a black beard and two shining eyes’, Haspelmath Reference Haspelmath2004: 33).

Mithun (Reference Mithun, Haiman and Thompson1988), writing about the historical changes and development of coordination in general, claims that it is common for coordinating conjunctions to originate as noun phrase linkers, then eventually grow to coordinate predicates and clauses (Mithun Reference Mithun, Haiman and Thompson1988: 350). As a punctuation mark, </> was limited to combining small units: actor/director, king/queen, colleague/therapist. As it entered the spoken language, speakers reanalyzed it as syntactic coordination, which allows them to coordinate larger units, like whole verb phrases – doing office hours slash watching Olympics.