Volume 13, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1876-1933
  • E-ISSN: 1876-1941
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



Comparative Correlatives (CCs) are biclausal constructions (e.g. ) that have complex semantics and form. This is the first construction grammar-based corpus study to investigate Slovak CCs, based on a 500-token sample. I argue that intra-clausal word-order phenomena can be explained through processing efficiency, based on Hawkins’ principle of Early Immediate Constituents (2004), and I use covarying-collexeme analysis (Stefanowitsch & Gries 2005) to provide evidence for the existence of meso-constructions. The findings of this study contribute to construction grammar’s “aspirations toward universal applicability” (Fried 2017: 249), proving that the theory is also suitable for analysis of syntactic patterns in Slavic languages.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Abeillé, A., Borsley, R. D., & Espinal, M.-T.
    (2006) The syntax of comparative correlatives in French and Spanish. InS. Müller (Ed.), Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar (pp.6–26). CSLI Publications. 10.21248/hpsg.2006.1
    https://doi.org/10.21248/hpsg.2006.1 [Google Scholar]
  2. Beck, S.
    (1997) On the semantics of comparative conditionals. Linguistics and Philosophy20(3). 229–271. 10.1023/A:1005361901518
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005361901518 [Google Scholar]
  3. Betáková, V.
    (1955) Poznámky k Učebnici jazyka slovenského pre štvorročné odborné školy [Comments on the Slovak language textbook for four-year vocational schools]. Slovenská Reč, 20(5), 313–323.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Boas, H. C.
    (2010) Comparing constructions across languages. InH. C. Boas (Ed.), Contrastive studies in construction grammar (pp.1–20). John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.10.02boa
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.10.02boa [Google Scholar]
  5. Borsley, R. D.
    (2004a) On the periphery: Comparative correlatives in Polish and English. Proceedings of Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics, 12, 59–90.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. (2004b) An approach to English comparative correlatives. InS. Müller (Ed.), Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, Center for Computational Linguistics, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (pp.70–92). CSLI Publications. 10.21248/hpsg.2004.4
    https://doi.org/10.21248/hpsg.2004.4 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bybee, J.
    (2006) From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition. Language, 82(4), 711–733. 10.1353/lan.2006.0186
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2006.0186 [Google Scholar]
  8. (2010) Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511750526
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511750526 [Google Scholar]
  9. (2012) Domain-general processes as the basis for grammar. InM. Tallermann & K. R. Gibson (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of language evolution (pp.528–536). Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. (2013) Usage-based theory and exemplar representations of constructions. InTh. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar (pp.49–69). Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Cappelle, B.
    (2011) The the… the… construction: Meaning and readings. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(1), 99–117. 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.08.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.08.002 [Google Scholar]
  12. Culicover, P. W., & Jackendoff, R.
    (1999) The view from the periphery: The English comparative correlative. Linguistic Inquiry, 30(4), 543–571. 10.1162/002438999554200
    https://doi.org/10.1162/002438999554200 [Google Scholar]
  13. den Dikken, M.
    (2005) Comparative correlatives comparatively. Linguistic Inquiry, 36(4), 497–532. 10.1162/002438905774464377
    https://doi.org/10.1162/002438905774464377 [Google Scholar]
  14. Diessel, H.
    (2015) Usage-based construction grammar. InE. Dabrowska & D. Divjak (Eds.), Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (pp.296–322). Mouton De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110292022‑015
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110292022-015 [Google Scholar]
  15. Dvonč, L., Horák, G., Miko, F., Mistrík, J., Oravec, J., Ružička, J., & Urbančok, M.
    (1966) Morfológia Slovenského Jazyka [Slovak morhology] (J. Ružička, Ed.). Slovenská Akadémia Vied.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Fillmore, C. J., Kay, P., & O’Connor, M. C.
    (1988) Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone. Language, 64(3), 501–538. 10.2307/414531
    https://doi.org/10.2307/414531 [Google Scholar]
  17. Fried, M.
    (2017) Construction grammar in the service of Slavic linguistics, and vice versa. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 25(2), 241–276. 10.1353/jsl.2017.0010
    https://doi.org/10.1353/jsl.2017.0010 [Google Scholar]
  18. Goldberg, A.
    (1995) Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. The University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. (2003) Constructions: A new theoretical approach to language. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences, 7(5), 219–224. 10.1016/S1364‑6613(03)00080‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00080-9 [Google Scholar]
  20. (2006) Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Gries, S. Th.
    (2007) Coll.analysis 3.2a. A program for R for Windows 2.x
    [Google Scholar]
  22. (2009) Statistics for Linguistics with R: A Practical Introduction. Mouton De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110216042
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110216042 [Google Scholar]
  23. (2015a) Quantitative designs and statistical techniques. InD. Biber & R. Reppen (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of English Corpus Linguistics (pp.50–71). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139764377.004
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139764377.004 [Google Scholar]
  24. (2015b) The role of quantitative methods in cognitive linguistics: Corpus and experimental data on (relative) frequency and contingency of words and constructions. InJ. Daems, E. Zenner, K. Heylen, D. Speelman, & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), Change of paradigms-new paradoxes: Recontextualizing language and linguistics (pp.311–325). Mouton De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Gutiérrez-Rexach, J.
    (2009) Correlativization and degree quantification in Spanish. InP. J. Masullo, E. O’Rourke, & C.-H. Huang (Eds.), Romance linguistics 2007: Selected papers from the 37th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Pittsburgh, 15–18 March 2007 (Vol.304, pp.121–142). John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.304.09gut
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.304.09gut [Google Scholar]
  26. Hawkins, J. A.
    (1994) A performance theory of order and constituency. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. (2004) Efficiency and complexity in grammars. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199252695.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199252695.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  28. (2009) Language universals and the performance-grammar correspondence hypothesis. InM. Christiansen, Ch. Collins, & S. Edelman (Eds.), Language universals (pp.54–78). Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195305432.003.0004
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195305432.003.0004 [Google Scholar]
  29. Hoffmann, Th.
    (2014a) Comparing English comparative correlatives. Unpublished ms.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. (2014b) The cognitive evolution of Englishes: The role of constructions in the dynamic model. InM. H. Sarah Buschfeld, Th. Hoffmann, & A. Kautzsch (Eds.), The evolution of Englishes: The dynamic model and beyond (pp.160–180). John Benjamins. 10.1075/veaw.g49.10hof
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g49.10hof [Google Scholar]
  31. (2017) Construction grammar as cognitive structuralism: The interaction of constructional networks and processing in the diachronic evolution of English comparative correlatives. English Language and Linguistics, 21(2), 349–373. 10.1017/S1360674317000181
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674317000181 [Google Scholar]
  32. (2018) Comparing comparative correlatives: The German vs. English construction network. InH. C. Boas & A. Ziem (Eds.), Constructional approaches to syntactic structures in German (pp.181–203). Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110457155‑005
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110457155-005 [Google Scholar]
  33. (2019) English comparative correlatives: Diachronic and synchronic variation at the lexicon-syntax interface [Studies in English Language]. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108569859
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108569859 [Google Scholar]
  34. Hoffmann, Th., Horsch, J., & Brunner, T.
    (2019) The more data, the better: A usage-based account of the English comparative correlative construction. Cognitive Linguistics, 30(1), 1–36. 10.1515/cog‑2018‑0036
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2018-0036 [Google Scholar]
  35. Horsch, J.
    (2019) Slovak comparative correlatives: New insights. Jazykovedný Časopis, 70(2), 180–190. 10.2478/jazcas‑2019‑0049
    https://doi.org/10.2478/jazcas-2019-0049 [Google Scholar]
  36. Marsinová, M.
    (1955) Spracovanie gramatických kategórií v normatívnom slovníku [The processing of grammatical categories in normative dictionaries]. Slovenská reč, 20(1), 29–39.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. McCawley, J. D.
    (1988) The comparative conditional construction in English, German, and Chinese. InGeneral Session and Parasession on Grammaticalization (pp.176–187). Berkeley Linguistics Society. 10.3765/bls.v14i0.1791
    https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v14i0.1791 [Google Scholar]
  38. Mistrík, J.
    (1983) Moderná slovenčina [Modrn Slovak]. Bratislava: Slovenské Pedagogické Nakladateľstvo.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Oravec, J.
    (1954) Používanie slova “čo” v spisovnej slovenčine [The use of the word “čo” in written Slovak]. Jazykovedný časopis, 4(8), 216–233.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Orlovský, J.
    (1971) Slovenská syntax. Obzor.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Pauliny, E.
    (1981) Slovenská gramatika (Opis jazykového systému) [Slovak grammar (Description of the language system)]. Slovenské Pedagogické Nakladateľstvo.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Pauliny, E., Ružička, J., & Štolc, J.
    (1963) Slovenská gramatika [Slovak grammar]. Slovenské Pedagogické Nakladateľstvo.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Risová, E.
    (1990) Spytovali ste sa: O používaní slov väčšmi a viac [You asked: On the use of the words väčšmi and viac]. Kultúra slova, 21(3), 95–96.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Roig, A.
    (2014) Quel mode de liaison dans les corrélatives isomorphes « plus…plus » et « autant…autant » ?InActes du IVe CMLF (Vol.8, pp.2533–2549). SHS Web of Conferences. 10.1051/shsconf/20140801053
    https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20140801053 [Google Scholar]
  45. Sabol, F.
    (1982) Slovo čím v platnosti zámena, častice a spojky [The word čím used as a pronoun, particle, and conjunction]. Slovenská reč, 47(1), 51–54.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Sag, I. A.
    (2010) English filler-gap constructions. Language, 86(3), 486–545. 10.1353/lan.2010.0002
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2010.0002 [Google Scholar]
  47. Sánchez López, C.
    (2009) Las correlaciones comparativas de proporcionaldad en español. Boletín de La Real Academia Española, LXXXIX(CCXCIX), 161–192.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. (2014) The left periphery of Spanish comparative correlatives. InA. Dufter & Á. S. O. de Toledo (Eds.), Left sentence peripheries in Spanish: Diachronic, variationist and comparative perspectives (Vol.214, pp.155–183). John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Slovenský národný korpus [Slovak National Corpus] – Version prim-7.0-public-all
    Slovenský národný korpus [Slovak National Corpus] – Version prim-7.0-public-all (2015) Bratislava: Jazykovedný ústav L. Štúra SAV [Ľudovít Štúr Institute of Linguistics of the Slovak Academy of Sciences]. Available at WWW: korpus.juls.savba.sk
  50. Šimková, M., Gajdošová, K., Kmeťová, B., & Debnár, M.
    (2017) Slovenský národný korpus: Texty, anotácie, vyhľadávania [The Slovak National Corpus: texts, annotations, research]. Mikula.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Speyer, A.
    (2011) Je stärker der Fokus, desto geringer die Einbettung? Zum Status des je-Satzes in je-desto-Gefügen. Linguistische Berichte225. 43–61.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Stefanowitsch, A., & Gries, S. Th.
    (2005) Covarying collexemes. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 1(1), 1–43. 10.1515/cllt.2005.1.1.1
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt.2005.1.1.1 [Google Scholar]
  53. Szmrecsanyi, B.
    (2004) On operationalizing syntactic complexity. InG. Purnelle, F. Cédrick, & A. Dister (Eds.), Le poids des mots. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Textual Data Statistical Analysis. Louvain-la-Neuve, March 10–12, 2004, vol.2 (pp.1032–1039). Presses universitaires de Louvain.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Zhan, F. & Closs Traugott, E.
    (2020) A study of the development of the Chinese comparative correlative construction from the perspective of constructionalization. Diachronica37(1). 83–126. 10.1075/dia.18025.zha
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.18025.zha [Google Scholar]

Data & Media 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