Volume 22, Issue 4
  • ISSN 1384-6655
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9811
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes


Given a sentence such as , the verb leads people to interpret as referring to , whereas leads people to interpret as referring to . This phenomenon is known as implicit causality (IC). Recent studies have shown that verbs’ causality biases closely correspond to the verbs’ semantic classes, as classified in , a lexicon that groups verbs into classes on the basis of syntactic behavior. The current study further investigates the relationship between causality biases and semantic classes. Using corpus data we show that the collostruction strength between verbs and the syntactic constructions that classes are based on can be a good predictor of causality bias. This result suggests that the relation between semantic class and causality bias is not a categorical matter; more typical members of the semantic class show a stronger causality bias than less typical members.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Au, T. K. F.
    (1986) A verb is worth a thousand words: The causes and consequences of interpersonal events implicit in language. Journal of Memory and Language, 25(1), 104–122. doi: 10.1016/0749‑596X(86)90024‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(86)90024-0 [Google Scholar]
  2. Bates, D. , Maechler, M. , Bolker, B. , & Walker, S.
    (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. doi: 10.18637/jss.v067.i01
    https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bott, O. , & Solstad, T.
    (2014) From verbs to discourse: A novel account of implicit causality. In B. Hemforth , B. Mertins & C. Fabricius-Hansen (Eds.), Meaning and Understanding across Languages: Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics (pp.213–251). Berlin: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Brown, R. , & Fish, D.
    (1983) The psychological causality implicit in language. Cognition, 14(3), 237–273. doi: 10.1016/0010‑0277(83)90006‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(83)90006-9 [Google Scholar]
  5. Chomsky, N.
    (1965) Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Clark, H. H.
    (1973) The language-as-fixed-effect fallacy: A critique of language statistics in psychological research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12(4), 335–359. doi: 10.1016/S0022‑5371(73)80014‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(73)80014-3 [Google Scholar]
  7. Crinean, M. , & Garnham, A.
    (2006) Implicit causality, implicit consequentiality and semantic roles. Language and Cognitive Processes, 21(5), 636–648. doi: 10.1080/01690960500199763
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960500199763 [Google Scholar]
  8. Croft, W.
    (2012) Verbs: Aspect and Causal Structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199248582.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199248582.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  9. Davies, M. (2017) The Corpus of Contemporary American English: 450 million words, 1990-present. Available online atcorpus.byu.edu/coca/ (last accessedAugust 2017).
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Ferstl, E. C. , Garnham, A. , & Manouilidou, C.
    (2011) Implicit causality bias in English: A corpus of 300 verbs. Behavior Research Methods, 43(1), 124–135. doi: 10.3758/s13428‑010‑0023‑2
    https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-010-0023-2 [Google Scholar]
  11. Garnham, A.
    (2001) Mental Models and the Interpretation of Anaphora. Hove: Psychology Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Garvey, C. , & Caramazza, A.
    (1974) Implicit causality in verbs. Linguistic Inquiry, 5(3), 459–464.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Gries, S. Th.
    (2012) Frequencies, probabilities, and association measures in usage-/exemplar-based linguistics. Studies in Language, 36(3), 477–510. doi: 10.1075/sl.36.3.02gri
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.36.3.02gri [Google Scholar]
  14. (2015a) More (old and new) misunderstandings of collostructional analysis: On Schmid and Küchenhoff (2013). Cognitive Linguistics, 26(3), 505–536. doi: 10.1515/cog‑2014‑0092
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2014-0092 [Google Scholar]
  15. (2015b) The most under-used statistical method in corpus linguistics: Multi-level (and mixed-effects) models. Corpora, 10(1), 95–125. doi: 10.3366/cor.2015.0068
    https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2015.0068 [Google Scholar]
  16. Gries, S. Th ., & Stefanowitsch, A.
    (2004) Co-varying collexemes in the into-causative. In M. Achard & S. Kemmer (Eds.), Language, Culture, and Mind (pp.225–236). Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Goldberg, A. E.
    (1995) Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Hartshorne, J. K.
    (2013) What is implicit causality?. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 29(7), 804–824. doi: 10.1080/01690965.2013.796396
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2013.796396 [Google Scholar]
  19. Hartshorne, J. K. , O’Donnell, T. J. , & Tenenbaum, J. B.
    (2015) The causes and consequences explicit in verbs. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 30(6), 716–734. doi: 10.1080/23273798.2015.1008524
    https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2015.1008524 [Google Scholar]
  20. Hartshorne, J. K. , & Snedeker, J.
    (2012) Verb argument structure predicts implicit causality: The advantages of finer-grained semantics. Language and Cognitive Processes, 28(10), 1474–1508. doi: 10.1080/01690965.2012.689305
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2012.689305 [Google Scholar]
  21. Hoffman, C. , & Tchir, M. A.
    (1990) Interpersonal verbs and dispositional adjectives: The psychology of causality embodied in language. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(5), 765–778. doi: 10.1037/0022‑3514.58.5.765
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.58.5.765 [Google Scholar]
  22. Kipper-Schuler, K.
    (2005) VerbNet: A broad-coverage, comprehensive verb lexicon (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Computer and Information Science Dept., University of Pennsylvania. Philadelphia, PA.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Levin, B. , & Rappaport Hovav, M.
    (2005) Argument Realization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511610479
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610479 [Google Scholar]
  24. Long, D. L. , & De Ley, L.
    (2000) Implicit causality and discourse focus: The interaction of text and reader characteristics in pronoun resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 42(4), 545–570. doi: 10.1006/jmla.1999.2695
    https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1999.2695 [Google Scholar]
  25. MacWhinney, B.
    (2000) The CHILDES Project: Tools for Analyzing Talk. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Malle, B. F.
    (2002) Verbs of interpersonal causality and the folk theory of mind and behavior. In M. Shibatani (Ed.), The Grammar of Causation and Interpersonal Manipulation (pp.57–84). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.48.06mal
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.48.06mal [Google Scholar]
  27. Pesetsky, D.
    (1995) Zero Syntax: Experiencers and Cascades. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Pickering, M. J. , & Majid, A.
    (2007) What are implicit causality and consequentiality?Language and Cognitive Processes, 22(5), 780–788. doi: 10.1080/01690960601119876
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960601119876 [Google Scholar]
  29. Pinker, S.
    (1989) Learnability and Cognition: The Acquisition of Argument Structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. R Core Team (2017) R: A language and environment for statistical computing [Computer software]. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved fromhttps://www.R-project.org/ (last accessedAugust 2017).
  31. Rappaport Hovav, M. , & Levin, B.
    (1998) Building verb meanings. In M. Butt & W. Geuder (Eds.), The Projection of Arguments: Lexical and Compositional Factors (pp.97–134). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Rayson, P. , Archer, D. , Piao, S. L. , & McEnery, T.
    (2004, May). The UCREL semantic analysis system. Paper presented at the Beyond Named Entity Recognition Semantic Labelling for NLP Tasks in Association with 4th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2004) Workshop , Lisbon, Portugal.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Rohde, H. , Levy, R. , & Kehler, A.
    (2011) Anticipating explanations in relative clause processing. Cognition, 118(3), 339–358. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2010.10.016
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2010.10.016 [Google Scholar]
  34. Rudolph, U. , & Försterling, F.
    (1997) The psychological causality implicit in verbs: A review. Psychological Bulletin, 121(2), 192–218. doi: 10.1037/0033‑2909.121.2.192
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.121.2.192 [Google Scholar]
  35. Stefanowitsch, A. , & Gries, S. Th.
    (2003) Collostructions: Investigating the interaction between words and constructions. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics8(2). 209–243. doi: 10.1075/ijcl.8.2.03ste
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.8.2.03ste [Google Scholar]
  36. Stevenson, R. J. , Crawley, R. , & Kleinman, D.
    (1994) Thematic roles, focus and the representation of events. Language and Cognitive Processes, 9(4), 519–548. doi: 10.1080/01690969408402130
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01690969408402130 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): collostruction strength; constructions; implicit causality; semantic structure
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