1887
  1. Home
  2. Books
  3. Corpus Methods for Semantics
  4. Chapter

A case for the multifactorial assessment of learner language

The uses of may and can in French-English interlanguage

image of A case for the multifactorial assessment of learner language

In this study, we apply Gries and Divjak’s Behavioral Profile approach to compare native English can and may, learner English can and may, and French pouvoir. We annotated over 3,700 examples across three corpora according to more than 20 morphosyntactic and semantic features and we analysed the features’ distribution with a hierarchical cluster analysis and a logistic regression. The cluster analysis shows that French English learners build up fairly coherent categories that group the English modals together followed by pouvoir, but that they also consider pouvoir to be semantically more similar to can than to may. The regression strongly supports learners’ coherent categories; however, a variety of interactions shows where learners’ modal use still deviates from that of native speakers.

  • Affiliations: 1: New Mexico State University; 2: University of California, Santa Barbara

References

  1. Aijmer, K
    (2002) Modality in advanced Swedish learners’ written interlanguage. In S. Granger , J. Hung , & S. Petch-Tyson (Eds.), Computer learner corpora, second language acquisition and foreign language teaching (pp.55–76). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.6.07aij
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.6.07aij [Google Scholar]
  2. Arppe, A
    (2008) Univariate, bivariate and multivariate methods in corpus-based lexicography: A study of synonymy. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Helsinki. Available at: urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-10-5175-3.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Bartning, I
    (2009) The advanced learner variety: 10 years later. In E. Labeau , & F. Myles (Eds.), The advanced learner variety: The case of French (pp.11–40). Frankfurt/Main: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Bates, E. , & MacWhinney, B
    (1982) Functionalist approaches to grammar. In E. Wanner , & L. R. Gleitman (Eds.), Language acquisition: The state of the art (pp.173–218). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. (1989) Functionalism and the competition model. In B. MacWhinney , & E. Bates (Eds.), The cross-linguistic study of sentence processing (pp.3–73). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Bybee, J. , & Fleischman, S
    (1995)  Modality in language and discourse . Amsterdam: John 
Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.32
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.32 [Google Scholar]
  7. Byloo, P
    (2009) Modality and negation: A corpus-based study. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Antwerp.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Coates, J
    (1980) On the non-equivalence of may and can . Lingua , 50(3), 209–220. doi: 10.1016/0024‑3841(80)90026‑1
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(80)90026-1 [Google Scholar]
  9. (1983)  The semantics of the modal auxiliaries . London: Croom Helm.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Collins, P
    (2009)  Modals and quasi modals in English . Amsterdam: Rodopi.10.1163/9789042029095
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789042029095 [Google Scholar]
  11. De Haan, F
    (1997)  The interaction of modality and negation: A typological study . New York: Garland.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Depraetere, I. , & Reed, S
    (2006) Mood and modality in English. In B. Aarts , & A. MacMahon (Eds.), The handbook of English linguistics (pp.268–287). London: Blackwell.10.1002/9780470753002.ch12
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470753002.ch12 [Google Scholar]
  13. Deshors, S.C
    (2010) A multifactorial study of the uses of may and can in French-English interlanguage. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Sussex.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Divjak, D.S. , & Gries, St. Th
    (2006) Ways of trying in Russian: Clustering behavioral profiles. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory , 2(1), 23–60. doi: 10.1515/CLLT.2006.002
     https://doi.org/10.1515/CLLT.2006.002 [Google Scholar]
  15. (2008) Clusters in the mind? Converging evidence from near synonymy in Russian. The Mental Lexicon , 3(2), 188–213. doi: 10.1075/ml.3.2.03div
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.3.2.03div [Google Scholar]
  16. (2009) Corpus-based cognitive semantics: A contrastive study of phasal verbs in English and Russian. In K. Dziwirek , & B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (Eds.), Studies in cognitive corpus linguistics (pp.273–296). Frankfurt/Main: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Gabrielatos, C. , & Sarmento, S
    (2006) Central modals in an aviation corpus: Frequency and distribution. Letras de Hoje , 41(2), 215–240.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Gass, S
    (1996) Second language acquisition and linguistic theory: The role of language transfer. In W.C. Ritchie , & T.K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp.317–340). San Diego: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Gries, St. Th
    (2006) Corpus-based methods and cognitive semantics: The many meanings of to run . In St. Th. Gries , & A. Stefanowitsch (Eds.), Corpora in cognitive linguistics: Corpus-based approaches to syntax and lexis (pp.57–99). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110197709
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197709 [Google Scholar]
  20. (2010a) Behavioural Profiles 1.01: A program for R 2.7.1 and higher.
  21. (2010b) Behavioral profiles: A fine-grained and quantitative approach in corpus-based lexical semantics. The Mental Lexicon , 5(3), 323–346. 10.1075/ml.5.3.04gri
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.5.3.04gri [Google Scholar]
  22. Gries, St. Th. , & Deshors, S.C
    (To appear) Using regressions to explore deviations between corpus data and a standard/target: two suggestions. Corpora .
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Gries, St. Th. , & Divjak, D.S
    (2009) Behavioral profiles: A corpus-based approach to cognitive semantic analysis. In V. Evans , & S. Pourcel (Eds.), New directions in cognitive linguistics (pp.57–75). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/hcp.24.07gri
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.24.07gri [Google Scholar]
  24. (2010) Quantitative approaches in usage-based cognitive semantics: Myths, erroneous assumptions, and a proposal. In D. Glynn , & K. Fischer (Eds.), Quantitative cognitive semantics: Corpus-driven approaches (pp.333–354). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110226423.331
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110226423.331 [Google Scholar]
  25. Gries, St. Th. , & Otani, N
    (2010) Behavioral profiles: A corpus-based perspective on synonymy and antonymy. ICAME Journal , 34, 121–150.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Gries, St. Th
    &Wulff S (2013) The genitive alternation in Chinese and German ESL learners: Towards a multifactorial notion of context in learner corpus research. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics , 18(3), 327–356.10.1075/ijcl.18.3.04gri
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.18.3.04gri [Google Scholar]
  27. Hermerén, L
    (1978)  On Modality in English: A study of the semantics of the modals . Lund: LiberLäromedel/Gleerups.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Huddleston, R.D
    (2002)  The Cambridge grammar of the English language . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Hyltenstam, K. , Bartning, I. , & Fant, L
    (2005) High Level Proficiency in Second Language Use. Research program for Riksbanken Jubileumsfond. (Stockholm university) www.
biling.su.se/~AAA.

     [Google Scholar]
  30. Kilborn, K. , & Ito, T
    (1989) Sentence processing strategies in adult bilinguals. In B. MacWhinney , & E. Bates (Eds.), The cross-linguistic study of sentence processing (pp.257–291). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Klinge, A. , & Müller, H.H
    (2005) Modality: Intrigue and inspiration. In A. Klinge , & H.H. Müller (Eds.), Modality studies in form and function (pp.1–4). London: Equinox.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Leech, G
    (1969)  Towards a semantic description of English . Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. (2004)  Meaning and the English verb . London & New York: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. MacWhinney, B
    (2004) A unified model of language acquisition. Retrieved from 
psyling.psy.cmu.edu/papers/CM-general/unified.pdf [Accessed 18 June 2010].
  35. Neff, J. , Dafouz, E. , Herrera H. , Martínez, F. , & Rica, J.P
    (2003) Contrasting the use of learner corpora: The use of modal and reporting verbs in the expression of writer stance. In S. Granger , & S. Petch-Tyson (Eds.), Extending the scope of corpus-based research: New applications, new challenges (pp.211–230). Amsterdam: Rodopi.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Nuyts, J
    (2006) Modality: Overview and linguistic issues. In W. Frawley (Ed.), The expression of modality (pp.1–26). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Palmer, F
    (1979)  Modality and the English modals . London & New York: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Radden, G
    (2007) Interaction of modality and negation. In W. Chłopicki , A. Pawelec , & A. Pokojska (Eds.), Cognition in language: Volume in Honour of Professor Elżbieta Tabakowska (pp.224–254). Kraków: Tertium.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. R Development Core Team
    (2010)  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Foundation for statistical computing . Vienna, Austria. www.R-project.org.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Salkie, R
    (2000) Corpus linguistics: A brief guide to research in French language and linguistics. AFLS Cahiers , 6, 44–52.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. (2004) Towards a non-unitary analysis of modality. In L. Gournay , & J.-M. Merle (Eds.), Contrastes: mélanges offerts à Jacqueline Guillemin-Flescher (pp.169–182). Paris: Ophrys.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Vendler, Z
    (1967) Verbs and times. In Z. Vendler (Ed.), Linguistics in philosophy (pp.97–121). New York: Cornell University Press.
     [Google Scholar]

References

  1. Aijmer, K
    (2002) Modality in advanced Swedish learners’ written interlanguage. In S. Granger , J. Hung , & S. Petch-Tyson (Eds.), Computer learner corpora, second language acquisition and foreign language teaching (pp.55–76). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.6.07aij
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.6.07aij [Google Scholar]
  2. Arppe, A
    (2008) Univariate, bivariate and multivariate methods in corpus-based lexicography: A study of synonymy. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Helsinki. Available at: urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-10-5175-3.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Bartning, I
    (2009) The advanced learner variety: 10 years later. In E. Labeau , & F. Myles (Eds.), The advanced learner variety: The case of French (pp.11–40). Frankfurt/Main: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Bates, E. , & MacWhinney, B
    (1982) Functionalist approaches to grammar. In E. Wanner , & L. R. Gleitman (Eds.), Language acquisition: The state of the art (pp.173–218). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. (1989) Functionalism and the competition model. In B. MacWhinney , & E. Bates (Eds.), The cross-linguistic study of sentence processing (pp.3–73). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Bybee, J. , & Fleischman, S
    (1995)  Modality in language and discourse . Amsterdam: John 
Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.32
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.32 [Google Scholar]
  7. Byloo, P
    (2009) Modality and negation: A corpus-based study. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Antwerp.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Coates, J
    (1980) On the non-equivalence of may and can . Lingua , 50(3), 209–220. doi: 10.1016/0024‑3841(80)90026‑1
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(80)90026-1 [Google Scholar]
  9. (1983)  The semantics of the modal auxiliaries . London: Croom Helm.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Collins, P
    (2009)  Modals and quasi modals in English . Amsterdam: Rodopi.10.1163/9789042029095
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789042029095 [Google Scholar]
  11. De Haan, F
    (1997)  The interaction of modality and negation: A typological study . New York: Garland.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Depraetere, I. , & Reed, S
    (2006) Mood and modality in English. In B. Aarts , & A. MacMahon (Eds.), The handbook of English linguistics (pp.268–287). London: Blackwell.10.1002/9780470753002.ch12
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470753002.ch12 [Google Scholar]
  13. Deshors, S.C
    (2010) A multifactorial study of the uses of may and can in French-English interlanguage. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Sussex.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Divjak, D.S. , & Gries, St. Th
    (2006) Ways of trying in Russian: Clustering behavioral profiles. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory , 2(1), 23–60. doi: 10.1515/CLLT.2006.002
     https://doi.org/10.1515/CLLT.2006.002 [Google Scholar]
  15. (2008) Clusters in the mind? Converging evidence from near synonymy in Russian. The Mental Lexicon , 3(2), 188–213. doi: 10.1075/ml.3.2.03div
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.3.2.03div [Google Scholar]
  16. (2009) Corpus-based cognitive semantics: A contrastive study of phasal verbs in English and Russian. In K. Dziwirek , & B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (Eds.), Studies in cognitive corpus linguistics (pp.273–296). Frankfurt/Main: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Gabrielatos, C. , & Sarmento, S
    (2006) Central modals in an aviation corpus: Frequency and distribution. Letras de Hoje , 41(2), 215–240.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Gass, S
    (1996) Second language acquisition and linguistic theory: The role of language transfer. In W.C. Ritchie , & T.K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp.317–340). San Diego: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Gries, St. Th
    (2006) Corpus-based methods and cognitive semantics: The many meanings of to run . In St. Th. Gries , & A. Stefanowitsch (Eds.), Corpora in cognitive linguistics: Corpus-based approaches to syntax and lexis (pp.57–99). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110197709
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197709 [Google Scholar]
  20. (2010a) Behavioural Profiles 1.01: A program for R 2.7.1 and higher.
  21. (2010b) Behavioral profiles: A fine-grained and quantitative approach in corpus-based lexical semantics. The Mental Lexicon , 5(3), 323–346. 10.1075/ml.5.3.04gri
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.5.3.04gri [Google Scholar]
  22. Gries, St. Th. , & Deshors, S.C
    (To appear) Using regressions to explore deviations between corpus data and a standard/target: two suggestions. Corpora .
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Gries, St. Th. , & Divjak, D.S
    (2009) Behavioral profiles: A corpus-based approach to cognitive semantic analysis. In V. Evans , & S. Pourcel (Eds.), New directions in cognitive linguistics (pp.57–75). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/hcp.24.07gri
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.24.07gri [Google Scholar]
  24. (2010) Quantitative approaches in usage-based cognitive semantics: Myths, erroneous assumptions, and a proposal. In D. Glynn , & K. Fischer (Eds.), Quantitative cognitive semantics: Corpus-driven approaches (pp.333–354). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110226423.331
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110226423.331 [Google Scholar]
  25. Gries, St. Th. , & Otani, N
    (2010) Behavioral profiles: A corpus-based perspective on synonymy and antonymy. ICAME Journal , 34, 121–150.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Gries, St. Th
    &Wulff S (2013) The genitive alternation in Chinese and German ESL learners: Towards a multifactorial notion of context in learner corpus research. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics , 18(3), 327–356.10.1075/ijcl.18.3.04gri
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.18.3.04gri [Google Scholar]
  27. Hermerén, L
    (1978)  On Modality in English: A study of the semantics of the modals . Lund: LiberLäromedel/Gleerups.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Huddleston, R.D
    (2002)  The Cambridge grammar of the English language . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Hyltenstam, K. , Bartning, I. , & Fant, L
    (2005) High Level Proficiency in Second Language Use. Research program for Riksbanken Jubileumsfond. (Stockholm university) www.
biling.su.se/~AAA.

     [Google Scholar]
  30. Kilborn, K. , & Ito, T
    (1989) Sentence processing strategies in adult bilinguals. In B. MacWhinney , & E. Bates (Eds.), The cross-linguistic study of sentence processing (pp.257–291). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Klinge, A. , & Müller, H.H
    (2005) Modality: Intrigue and inspiration. In A. Klinge , & H.H. Müller (Eds.), Modality studies in form and function (pp.1–4). London: Equinox.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Leech, G
    (1969)  Towards a semantic description of English . Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. (2004)  Meaning and the English verb . London & New York: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. MacWhinney, B
    (2004) A unified model of language acquisition. Retrieved from 
psyling.psy.cmu.edu/papers/CM-general/unified.pdf [Accessed 18 June 2010].
  35. Neff, J. , Dafouz, E. , Herrera H. , Martínez, F. , & Rica, J.P
    (2003) Contrasting the use of learner corpora: The use of modal and reporting verbs in the expression of writer stance. In S. Granger , & S. Petch-Tyson (Eds.), Extending the scope of corpus-based research: New applications, new challenges (pp.211–230). Amsterdam: Rodopi.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Nuyts, J
    (2006) Modality: Overview and linguistic issues. In W. Frawley (Ed.), The expression of modality (pp.1–26). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Palmer, F
    (1979)  Modality and the English modals . London & New York: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Radden, G
    (2007) Interaction of modality and negation. In W. Chłopicki , A. Pawelec , & A. Pokojska (Eds.), Cognition in language: Volume in Honour of Professor Elżbieta Tabakowska (pp.224–254). Kraków: Tertium.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. R Development Core Team
    (2010)  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Foundation for statistical computing . Vienna, Austria. www.R-project.org.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Salkie, R
    (2000) Corpus linguistics: A brief guide to research in French language and linguistics. AFLS Cahiers , 6, 44–52.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. (2004) Towards a non-unitary analysis of modality. In L. Gournay , & J.-M. Merle (Eds.), Contrastes: mélanges offerts à Jacqueline Guillemin-Flescher (pp.169–182). Paris: Ophrys.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Vendler, Z
    (1967) Verbs and times. In Z. Vendler (Ed.), Linguistics in philosophy (pp.97–121). New York: Cornell University Press.
     [Google Scholar]

  • From This Site

    /content/books/9789027270337-hcp.43.07des
    dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal
    10
    5
/content/books/9789027270337-hcp.43.07des
dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
-contentType:Journal
10
5
Chapter
content/books/9789027270337
Book
false
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error