1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Languages in Contrast
  4. Online First Articles
  5. Online First Article
image of Constraints and lexical conditioning in the dative alternation
EPUB
PDF

Abstract

Abstract

This article presents a cross-linguistic variationist study of the dative alternations in English ( vs. ) and Dutch ( vs. ). We use logistic mixed-effects regression and lasso regression to assess the probabilistic conditioning of dative choices as a function of morphosyntactic, semantico-pragmatic and lexical constraints in both languages. In addition, we test the predictive accuracy of our two language-specific models cross-linguistically. The results show a substantial overlap in the probabilistic constraints, but also a larger reliance on lexical content in Dutch compared to English, which suggests differences in complexity across the English and Dutch dative alternations. The methodology adopted in this study may pave a new way for comparative variational linguistics.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/lic.00052.eng
2024-09-20
2024-10-06

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/lic.00052.eng
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/10.1075/lic.00052.eng/lic.00052.eng.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/lic.00052.eng&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B. and Walker, S.
    2015 Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software(): –. 10.18637/jss.v067.i01
     https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01 [Google Scholar]
  2. Behaghel, O.
    1909 Beziehungen zwischen Umfang und Reihenfolge von Satzgliedern. Indogermanische Forschungen: –.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Bresnan, J., Cueni, A., Nikitina, T. and Baayen, R. H.
    2007 Predicting the Dative Alternation. InCognitive Foundations of Interpretation, G. Boume, I. Kraemer and J. Zwarts (eds), –. Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Bresnan, J. and Ford, M.
    2010 Predicting Syntax: Processing Dative Constructions in American and Australian Varieties of English. Language(): –. 10.1353/lan.0.0189
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.0.0189 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bresnan, J. and Hay, J.
    2008 Gradient Grammar: An Effect of Animacy on the Syntax of Give in New Zealand and American English. Lingua(): –. 10.1016/j.lingua.2007.02.007
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2007.02.007 [Google Scholar]
  6. Broekhuis, H. and Corver, N.
    2016 Syntax of Dutch: Verbs and Verb Phrases. Volume 3. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bušta, J., Herman, O., Jakubíček, M., Krek, S. and Novak, B.
    2017 JSI Newsfeed Corpus. 9th International Corpus Linguistics Conference. Birmingham, England, 24–28 July 2017. University of Birmingham. –.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Chafe, W. L.
    1976 Givenness, Contrastiveness, Definiteness, Subjects, Topics and Point of View. InSubject and Topic, C. N. Li (ed.), –. New York: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Colleman, T.
    2009 Verb Disposition in Argument Structure Alternations: A Corpus Study of the Dative Alternation in Dutch. Language Sciences(): –. 10.1016/j.langsci.2008.01.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2008.01.001 [Google Scholar]
  10. 2011 Ditransitive Verbs and the Ditransitive Construction: A Diachronic Perspective. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik: –. 10.1515/zaa‑2011‑0408
     https://doi.org/10.1515/zaa-2011-0408 [Google Scholar]
  11. Colleman, T. and De Clerck, B.
    2009 ‘Caused Motion’? The Semantics of the English to-Dative and the Dutch aan-Dative. Cognitive Linguistics(): –. 10.1515/COGL.2009.002
     https://doi.org/10.1515/COGL.2009.002 [Google Scholar]
  12. Collins, P.
    1995 The Indirect Object Construction in English: An Informational Approach. Linguistics: –. 10.1515/ling.1995.33.1.35
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1995.33.1.35 [Google Scholar]
  13. Cysouw, M.
    2013 Disentangling Geography from Genealogy. InSpace in Language and Linguistics, P. Auer, M. Hilpert, A. Stukenbrock and B. Szmrecsanyi (eds), –. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110312027.21
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110312027.21 [Google Scholar]
  14. Davies, M.
    2018 The 14 Billion Word iWeb Corpus. Available athttps://www.english-corpora.org/iWeb/ [last accessed22 September 2020].
     [Google Scholar]
  15. De Cuypere, L. and Verbeke, S.
    2013 Dative Alternation in Indian English: A Corpus-Based Analysis. World Englishes(): –. 10.1111/weng.12017
     https://doi.org/10.1111/weng.12017 [Google Scholar]
  16. Diwersy, S., Evert, S. and Neumann, S.
    2014 A Weakly Supervised Multivariate Approach to the Study of Language Variation: Motion Events from a Parallel Corpus. InAggregating Dialectology, Typology, and Register Analysis, B. Szmrecsanyi and B. Wälchli (eds), –. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110317558.174
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110317558.174 [Google Scholar]
  17. Dubois, T.
    2023 The Complexity Principle and Lexical Complexity in the English and Dutch Dative Alternation. InDitransitives in Germanic Languages, E. Zehentner, M. Röthlisberger and T. Colleman (eds), –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/sigl.7.10dub
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sigl.7.10dub [Google Scholar]
  18. Dubois, T., Paquot, M. and Szmrecsanyi, B.
    2023 Alternation Phenomena and Language Proficiency: The Genitive Alternation in the Spoken Language of EFL Learners. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory(): –. 10.1515/cllt‑2021‑0078
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2021-0078 [Google Scholar]
  19. Enghels, R., Defrancq, B. and Jansegers, M.
    2020 Reflections on the Use of Data and Methods in Contrastive Linguistics. InNew Approaches to Contrastive Linguistics: Empirical and Methodological Challenges, R. Enghels, B. Defrancq and M. Jansegers (eds), –. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110682588‑001
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110682588-001 [Google Scholar]
  20. Friedman, J., Hastie, T. and Tibshirani, R.
    2010 Regularization Paths for Generalized Linear Models via Coordinate Descent. Journal of Statistical Software(): –. 10.18637/jss.v033.i01
     https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v033.i01 [Google Scholar]
  21. Garretson, G., O’Connor, C., Skarabela, B. and Hogan, M.
    2004 Coding Practices Used in the Project Optimal Typology of Determiner Phrases. Unpublished Manuscript. Boston University.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Geleyn, T.
    2017 Syntactic Variation and Diachrony. The Case of the Dutch Dative Alternation. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory(): –. 10.1515/cllt‑2015‑0062
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2015-0062 [Google Scholar]
  23. Goldberg, A. E.
    1995 Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Grafmiller, J., Szmrecsanyi, B., Röthlisberger, M. and Heller, B.
    2018 General Introduction: A Comparative Perspective on Probabilistic Variation in Grammar. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics(): –. 10.5334/gjgl.690
     https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.690 [Google Scholar]
  25. Gries, S. T.
    2003 Towards a Corpus-Based Identification of Prototypical Instances of Constructions. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics(): –. 10.1075/arcl.1.02gri
     https://doi.org/10.1075/arcl.1.02gri [Google Scholar]
  26. 2015 The Most Under-Used Statistical Method in Corpus Linguistics: Multi-Level (and Mixed-Effects) Models. Corpora(): –. 10.3366/cor.2015.0068
     https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2015.0068 [Google Scholar]
  27. Gries, S. T. and Stefanowitsch, A.
    2004 Extending Collostructional Analysis: A Corpus-Based Perspective on ‘Alternations’. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics(): –. 10.1075/ijcl.9.1.06gri
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.9.1.06gri [Google Scholar]
  28. Gries, S. T. and Wulff, S.
    2013 New Frontiers in Learner Corpus Research. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics(): –. 10.1075/ijcl.18.3.04gri
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.18.3.04gri [Google Scholar]
  29. Gundel, J. K., Hedberg, N. and Zacharski, R.
    1993 Cognitive Status and the Form of Referring Expressions in Discourse. Language(): –. 10.2307/416535
     https://doi.org/10.2307/416535 [Google Scholar]
  30. Hawkins, J. A.
    1994 A Performance Theory of Order and Constituency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Hosmer, D. W. and Lemeshow, S.
    2000 Applied Logistic Regression. New York: Wiley. 10.1002/0471722146
     https://doi.org/10.1002/0471722146 [Google Scholar]
  32. Kendall, T., Bresnan, J. and van Herk, G.
    2011 The Dative Alternation in African American English: Researching Syntactic Variation and Change across Sociolinguistic Datasets. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory(): –. 10.1515/cllt.2011.011
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt.2011.011 [Google Scholar]
  33. MacDonald, M. C.
    2013 How Language Production Shapes Language Form and Comprehension. Frontiers in Psychology: Article 226. 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00226
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00226 [Google Scholar]
  34. Miestamo, M.
    2008 Grammatical Complexity in Cross-Linguistic Perspective. InLanguage Complexity, M. Miestamo, K. Sinnemäki and F. Karlsson (eds), –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.94.04mie
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.94.04mie [Google Scholar]
  35. Newman, J.
    1996 Give: A Cognitive Linguistic Study. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110823714
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110823714 [Google Scholar]
  36. Oostdijk, N., Reynaert, M., Hoste, V. and Schuurman, I.
    2013 The Construction of a 500-Million-Word Reference Corpus of Contemporary Written Dutch. InEssential Speech and Language Technology for Dutch: Results by the STEVIN Programme, P. Spyns and J. Odijk (eds), –. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑642‑30910‑6_13
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30910-6_13 [Google Scholar]
  37. Poplack, S. and Tagliamonte, S. A.
    2001 African American English in the Diaspora (Language in Society 30). Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Röthlisberger, M., Grafmiller, J. and Szmrecsanyi, B.
    2017 Cognitive Indigenization Effects in the English Dative Alternation. Cognitive Linguistics(): –. 10.1515/cog‑2016‑0051
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2016-0051 [Google Scholar]
  39. Sevenants, A.
    2023 ElasticToolsR (v1.4): Zenodo. Available at10.5281/zenodo.8113291 [last accessed11 July 2023].
     https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8113291 [Google Scholar]
  40. Speelman, D., Heylen, K. and Geeraerts, D.
    2018 Introduction. InMixed-Effects Regression Models in Linguistic, D. Speelman, K. Heylen and D. Geeraerts (eds), –. Cham: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑69830‑4_1
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69830-4_1 [Google Scholar]
  41. Szmrecsanyi, B. and Engel, A.
    2023 A Variationist Perspective on the Comparative Complexity of Four Registers at the Intersection of Mode and Formality. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory(): –. 10.1515/cllt‑2022‑0031
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2022-0031 [Google Scholar]
  42. Szmrecsanyi, B. and Grafmiller, J.
    2023 Comparative Variation Analysis: Grammatical Alternations in World Englishes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108863742
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108863742 [Google Scholar]
  43. Szmrecsanyi, B., Grafmiller, J., Bresnan, J., Rosenbach, A., Tagliamonte, S. A. and Todd, S.
    2017 Spoken Syntax in a Comparative Perspective: The Dative and Genitive Alternation in Varieties of English. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics(): –. 10.5334/gjgl.310
     https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.310 [Google Scholar]
  44. Szmrecsanyi, B., Grafmiller, J. and Rosseel, L.
    2019 Variation-Based Distance and Similarity Modeling: A Case Study in World Englishes. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence: Article 23. 10.3389/frai.2019.00023
     https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2019.00023 [Google Scholar]
  45. Tagliamonte, S. A.
    2013 Comparative Sociolinguistics. InThe Handbook of Language Variation and Change, J. K. Chambers and N. Schilling-Estes (eds), –. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell. 10.1002/9781118335598.ch6
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118335598.ch6 [Google Scholar]
  46. 2014 A Comparative Sociolinguistic Analysis of the Dative Alternation. InLinguistic Variation. Confronting Fact and Theory, R. Torres Cacoullos, N. Dion and A. Lapierre (eds), –. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Theijssen, D., ten Bosch, L., Boves, L., Cranen, B. and van Halteren, H.
    2013 Choosing Alternatives: Using Bayesian Networks and Memory-Based Learning to Study the Dative Alternation. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory(): –. 10.1515/cllt‑2013‑0007
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2013-0007 [Google Scholar]
  48. Van Beveren, A.
    2021 De verklaringen voor toegenomen explicietheid in vertalingen: Een multifactorieel corpusonderzoek naar de Nederlandse om-alternantie en datiefalternantie. PhD Thesis, University of Ghent.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Van de Velde, F., De Pascale, S. and Speelman, D.
    2022 Generalizability in Mixed Models: Lessons from Corpus Linguistics. Behavioral and Brain Sciences: –. 10.1017/S0140525X21000236
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X21000236 [Google Scholar]
  50. Van de Velde, F., Piersoul, J., De Smet, I. and Ruppert, E.
    2021 Changing Preferences in Cultural References. InCognitive Sociolinguistics Revisited, G. Kristiansen, K. Franco, S. De Pascale, L. Rosseel and W. Zhang (eds), –. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110733945‑047
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110733945-047 [Google Scholar]
  51. Van de Velde, F. and Pijpops, D.
    2021 Investigating Lexical Effects in Syntax with Regularized Regression (Lasso). Journal of Research Design and Statistics in Linguistics and Communication Science(): –. 10.1558/jrds.18964
     https://doi.org/10.1558/jrds.18964 [Google Scholar]
  52. van der Beek, L.
    2004 Argument Order Alternations in Dutch. Proceedings of the LFG04 Conference. Christchurch, New Zealand10–12 July 2004. Center for the Study of Language and Information. –.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Wasow, T. and Arnold, J. E.
    2003 Post-Verbal Constituent Ordering in English. InDeterminants of Grammatical Variation in English, G. Rohdenburg and B. Mondorf (eds), –. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110900019.119
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110900019.119 [Google Scholar]
  54. Wolk, C., Bresnan, J., Rosenbach, A. and Szmrecsanyi, B.
    2013 Dative and Genitive Variability in Late Modern English: Exploring Cross-Constructional Variation and Change. Diachronica(): –. 10.1075/dia.30.3.04wol
     https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.30.3.04wol [Google Scholar]
  55. Zaenen, A., Carletta, J., Garretson, G., Bresnan, J., Koontz-Garboden, A., Nikitina, T., O’Connor, C. and Wasow, T.
    2004 Animacy Encoding in English: Why and How. Proceedings of the 2004 ACL Workshop on Discourse Annotation. Barcelona, Spain, 25–26 July 2004. Association for Computational Linguistics. –. 10.3115/1608938.1608954
     https://doi.org/10.3115/1608938.1608954 [Google Scholar]
  56. Zehentner, E., Röthlisberger, M. and Colleman, T.
    2023 Ditransitive Constructions in Germanic Languages: New Avenues and New Challenges. InDitransitives in Germanic Languages, E. Zehentner, M. Röthlisberger and T. Colleman (eds), –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/sigl.7.00zeh
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sigl.7.00zeh [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/lic.00052.eng
Loading
Constraints and lexical conditioning in the dative alternation
John Benjamins ; https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.00052.eng
/content/journals/10.1075/lic.00052.eng
/content/journals/10.1075/lic.00052.eng
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: Dutch/English ; probabilistic conditioning ; lexical profiles ; dative alternation

Most Cited

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