1887
image of The copular subschema[become/devenir + past participle]in English and French
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This article presents a contrastive analysis of the English copular subschema [ + past participle] and the equivalent copular subschema [ + past participle] in French, based on web data. It is shown that both patterns are almost equally productive at the subject complement level. Furthermore, a more in-depth analysis demonstrates that, in the segment of participles with a high adjectival potential, accumulates more participle tokens than . Conversely, the reverse holds true for participles with a high verbal potential, in which case is characterized by more participle tokens than . This high amount of combinations between and eventive participles also suggests a higher degree of passivity for . However, in the segment of participles with an intermediate verbal potential, is slightly more type frequent than , which hints at an emerging productivity in this area for as well.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/lic.19013.van
2020-08-19
2020-09-20
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Baayen, R. H. and Lieber, R.
    1991 Productivity and English Derivation: A Corpus-Based Study. Linguistics29(5): 801–844. 10.1515/ling.1991.29.5.801
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1991.29.5.801 [Google Scholar]
  2. Baayen, R. H.
    1993 On Frequency, Transparency and Productivity. InYearbook of Morphology 1992, G. Booij and J. van Marle (eds), 181–208. Dordrecht: Springer. 10.1007/978‑94‑017‑3710‑4_7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3710-4_7 [Google Scholar]
  3. 2009 Corpus Linguistics in Morphology: Morphological Productivity. InCorpus Linguistics, A. Lüdeling, M. Kytö and M. Kytö (eds), 899–919. Berlin: de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Baroni, M. and Evert, S.
    2014 The ZipfR Package for Lexical Statistics: A Tutorial Introduction. Available atzipfr.r-forge.r-project.org/materials/zipfrtutorial.pdf [last accessed1 June 2019].
  5. Craig, C. G.
    1991 Ways to Go in Rama: A Case Study in Polygrammaticalization. InApproaches to Grammaticalization. Volume II. Types of grammatical markers, E. C. Traugott and B. Heine (eds), 455–492. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/tsl.19.2.20cra
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.19.2.20cra [Google Scholar]
  6. De Sutter, G.
    2005 Rood, Groen, Corpus! Een Taalgebruiksgebaseerde Analyse van Woordvolgordevariatie in Tweeledige Werkwoordelijke Eindgroepen. PhD Thesis, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.
  7. Dik, S. C.
    1987 Copula Auxiliarization: How and Why?InHistorical Development of Auxiliaries, M. Harris and P. Ramat (eds), 53–84. Berlin: de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110856910.53
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110856910.53 [Google Scholar]
  8. Gaeta, L. and Ricca, D.
    2006 Productivity in Italian Word Formation: A Variable-Corpus Approach. Linguistics44(1): 57–89. 10.1515/LING.2006.003
    https://doi.org/10.1515/LING.2006.003 [Google Scholar]
  9. Goldberg, A. E.
    1995Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Guehria, W.
    2011 La Structure Attributive avec devenir comme Construction Marquée dans l’Ensemble Sous-Déterminé des Phrases de Forme NVétat Adj. Langue Française171(3): 135–146. 10.3917/lf.171.0135
    https://doi.org/10.3917/lf.171.0135 [Google Scholar]
  11. Hopper, P. J. and Thompson, S. A.
    1980 Transitivity in Grammar and Discourse. Language56(2): 251–299. 10.1353/lan.1980.0017
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1980.0017 [Google Scholar]
  12. Kilgarriff, A., Baisa, V., Bušta, J., Jakubíček, M., Kovář, V., Michelfeit, J., Rychlý, P. and Suchomel, V.
    2014 The Sketch Engine: Ten Years On. Lexicography1(1): 7–36. 10.1007/s40607‑014‑0009‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s40607-014-0009-9 [Google Scholar]
  13. Laca, B.
    2000 Auxiliarisation et Copularisation. Revue de Linguistique Romane64: 427–443.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Raineri, S.
    2010 Analyse Contrastive Français-Anglais du Passif dans une Perspective Constructionnelle : Sens et Fonction de BE Ven, ETRE Vé, GET Ven et SE FAIRE Ver. PhD Thesis, Université de la Sorbonne nouvelle – Paris III.
  15. Sansò, A. and Ramat, A. G.
    2015 Deictic Motion Verbs as Passive Auxiliaries: The Case of Italian andare ‘go’ and venire ‘come’. Transactions of the Philological Society114(1): 1–24. 10.1111/1467‑968X.12059
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-968X.12059 [Google Scholar]
  16. Sleeman, P.
    2014 From Participle to Adjective in Germanic and Romance. InAdjectives in Germanic and Romance, P. Sleeman, F. Van de Velde and H. Perridon (eds), 171–198. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/la.212.07sle
    https://doi.org/10.1075/la.212.07sle [Google Scholar]
  17. Wickham, H.
    2009Ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. New York: Springer. 10.1007/978‑0‑387‑98141‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98141-3 [Google Scholar]
  18. Zeldes, A.
    2012Productivity in Argument Selection from Morphology to Syntax. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110303919
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110303919 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/lic.19013.van
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/lic.19013.van
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: become; passive construction; English/French; productivity; copular construction
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