1887
image of Into-causatives in World Englishes
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

The paper analyses the frequency and use of the relatively rare, yet highly productive causative construction in twenty varieties of English on the basis of the 1.9-billion word (GloWbE; ) and Dynamic Model. It hypothesises differences in frequency, variation in the preference for particularly frequent fillers as well as productivity differences in line with Schneider’s stages of linguistic evolution. However, it shows that only frequency differences reflect the Dynamic Model; with regard to the preference for frequent realisations and productivity, postcolonial varieties turn out to be very similar to British English. These results come as a surprise against the background of similar studies of the -construction, where all of these effects have been documented convincingly. It is argued that the properties of -causatives themselves (e.g. their idiomatic and semantic simplicity) might contribute to their more native-like usage patterns in postcolonial varieties of English.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/eww.21068.bru
2021-11-16
2021-12-03
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Baayen, Rolf Harald
    2008Analyzing Linguistic Data. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511801686
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511801686 [Google Scholar]
  2. Baayen, R. H., and Elnaz Shafaei-Bajestan
    2019languageR: Analyzing Linguistic Data: A Practical Introduction to Statistics. R package version 1.5.0. https:cran.r-project.org/package=language (accessedJanuary 21, 2021).
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad, and Edward Finegan
    1999Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow, Essex: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bruckmaier, Elisabeth
    2017Getting at Get in World Englishes. A Corpus-Based Semasiological-Syntactic Analysis. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110497311
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110497311 [Google Scholar]
  5. Brunner, Thomas, and Thomas Hoffmann
    2020 “The Way-Construction in World Englishes”. English World-Wide41: 1–32. 10.1075/eww.00038.bru
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.00038.bru [Google Scholar]
  6. Callies, Marcus
    2011 “Widening the goalposts of cognitive metaphor research”. InMarcus Callies, Wolfram R. Keller and Astrid Lohöfer. eds., Bi-Directionality in the Cognitive Sciences. Avenues, challenges, and limitations, 57–81. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.30.05cal
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.30.05cal [Google Scholar]
  7. Croft, William, and D. Alan Cruse
    2007Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Davies, Mark
    2013Corpus of Global Web-Based English. https://www.english-corpora.org/glowbe/.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Evert, Stefan
    2004 “A Simple LNRE Model for Random Character Sequences”. Proceedings of the 7èmes Journées Internationales d’Analyse Statistique des Données Textuelles. Louvain-la-Neuve, 411–422.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Evert, Stefan, and Marco Baroni
    2014The zipfR Package for Lexical Statistics: A Tutorial Introduction. zipfr.r-forge.r-project.org/materials/zipfr-tutorial.pdf (accessedJune 21, 2020).
    [Google Scholar]
  11. 2017zipfR: User-friendly LNRE Modelling in R. R package version 0.6-70. zipfr.r-forge.r-project.org (accessedNovember 27, 2017).
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Goldberg, Adele E.
    1995Constructions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. 2003 “Constructions: A new Theoretical Approach to Language”. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences7: 219–224. 10.1016/S1364‑6613(03)00080‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00080-9 [Google Scholar]
  14. Gries, Stefan Thomas
    2004HCFA 3.2 – A Program for Hierarchical Configural Frequency Analysis. www.linguistics.ucsb.edu/faculty/stgries/research/overview-research.html (accessed11 July 2014).
    [Google Scholar]
  15. 2009Statistics for Linguistics with R: A Practical Introduction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110216042
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110216042 [Google Scholar]
  16. Gries, Stefan Thomas, and Anatol Stefanowitsch
    2004 “Covarying Collexemes in the Into-causative”. InSally Rice, and John Newman. eds.Empirical and Experimental Methods in Cognitive/Functional Research. Stanford: CSLI Publications, 225–236.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Hoffmann, Thomas
    2011Preposition Placement in English. A Usage-based Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. 2014 “The Cognitive Evolution of Englishes: The Role of Constructions in the Dynamic Model”. InSarah Buschfeld, Thomas Hoffmann, and Magnus Huber. eds., The Evolution of Englishes: The Dynamic Model and Beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 160–180. 10.1075/veaw.g49.10hof
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g49.10hof [Google Scholar]
  19. 2019English Comparative Correlatives: Diachronic and Synchronic Variation at the Lexicon-Syntax Interface. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108569859
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108569859 [Google Scholar]
  20. 2020 “Marginal Argument Structure Constructions: The [Vthe Ntaboo-word out of]-construction in Post-colonial Englishes”. Linguistics Vanguard6: 1–8. 10.1515/lingvan‑2019‑0054
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2019-0054 [Google Scholar]
  21. Hundt, Marianne
    2020 “On models and modelling”. World Englishes40: 1–20.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Lange, Claudia
    2020 “English in South Asia”. InDaniel Schreier, Marianne Hundt, and Edgar W. Schneider. eds.The Cambridge Handbook of World Englishes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 236–262.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Mair, Christian
    2015 “Response to Davies and Fuchs”. English World-Wide36: 29–33. 10.1075/eww.36.1.02mai
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.36.1.02mai [Google Scholar]
  24. Mukherjee, Joybrato
    2015 “Response to Davies and Fuchs”. English World-Wide36: 34–37. 10.1075/eww.36.1.02muk
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.36.1.02muk [Google Scholar]
  25. Mukherjee, Joybrato, and Stefan Thomas Gries
    2010 “Lexical Gravity Across Varieties of English: An ICE-based Study of N-grams in Asian Englishes”. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics15: 520–548. 10.1075/ijcl.15.4.04gri
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.15.4.04gri [Google Scholar]
  26. Mukherjee, Joybrato, and Sebastian Hoffmann
    2006 “Describing Verb-complementational Profiles of New Englishes: A Pilot Study of Indian English”. English World-Wide27: 147–173. 10.1075/eww.27.2.03muk
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.27.2.03muk [Google Scholar]
  27. Rinker, Tyler W.
    2018Textstem: Tools for Stemming and Lemmatizing Text. R package version 0.1.4. Buffalo, New York. github.com/trinker/textstem (accessedJanuary 21, 2021).
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Rudanko, Juhani
    2011Changes in Complementation in British and American English: Corpus-Based Studies on Non-Finite Complements in Recent English. Houndsmills: Palgrave MacMillan. 10.1057/9780230305199
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230305199 [Google Scholar]
  29. Schneider, Edgar W.
    2003 “The Dynamics of New Englishes: From Identity Construction to Dialect Birth”. Language79: 233–281. 10.1353/lan.2003.0136
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2003.0136 [Google Scholar]
  30. 2004 “How to Trace Structural Nativization: Particle Verbs in World Englishes”. World Englishes23: 227–249. 10.1111/j.0883‑2919.2004.00348.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0883-2919.2004.00348.x [Google Scholar]
  31. 2007Postcolonial English: Varieties around the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511618901
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511618901 [Google Scholar]
  32. The IMS Open Corpus Workbench
    The IMS Open Corpus Workbench 2017 Version 3.2.30. cwb.sourceforge.net (accessedJanuary 21, 2021).
  33. Wulff, Stefanie, Anatol Stefanowitsch, and Stefan Thomas Gries
    2007 “Brutal Brits and Persuasive Americans: Variety-specific Meaning Construction in the Into-causative”. InGünter Radden, Thomas Köpke, Thomas Berg, and Peter Siemund. eds.Aspects of Meaning Construction. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 265–281. 10.1075/z.136.17wul
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.136.17wul [Google Scholar]
  34. Zeldes, Amir
    2013 Productive argument selection: “Is lexical semantics enough?”. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory9: 263–291. 10.1515/cllt‑2013‑0006
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2013-0006 [Google Scholar]
  35. Zipp, Lena, and Tobias Bernaisch
    2012 “Particle Verbs Across First and Second Language Varieties of English”. InMarianne Hundt, and Ulrike Gut. eds.Mapping Unity and Diversity Worldwide: Corpus-Based Studies of New Englishes. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 167–196. 10.1075/veaw.g43.07zip
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g43.07zip [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/eww.21068.bru
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/eww.21068.bru
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: idiom ; New Englishes ; World Englishes ; into-causative
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