从变分论的角度看四语域在模式与形式交叉处的比较复杂性

IF 1 2区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Benedikt Szmrecsanyi, Alexandra Engel
{"title":"从变分论的角度看四语域在模式与形式交叉处的比较复杂性","authors":"Benedikt Szmrecsanyi, Alexandra Engel","doi":"10.1515/cllt-2022-0031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this paper, we operationalize register differences at the intersection of formality and mode, and distinguish four broad register categories: spoken informal (conversations), spoken formal (parliamentary debates), written informal (blogs), and written formal (newspaper articles). We are specifically interested in the comparative probabilistic/variationist complexity of these registers – when speakers have grammatical choices, are the probabilistic grammars regulating these choices more or less complex in particular registers than in others? Based on multivariate modeling of richly annotated datasets covering three grammatical alternations in two languages (English and Dutch), we assess the complexity of probabilistic grammars by drawing on three criteria: (a) the number of constraints on variant choice, (b) the number of interactions between constraints, and (c) the relative importance of lexical conditioning. Analysis shows that contrary to theorizing in variationist sociolinguistics, probabilistic complexity differences between registers are not quantitatively simple: formal registers are consistently the most complex ones, while spoken registers are the least complex ones. The most complex register under study is written-formal quality newspaper writing. We submit that the complexity differentials we uncover are a function of acquisitional difficulty, of on-line processing limitations, and of normative pressures.","PeriodicalId":45605,"journal":{"name":"Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory","volume":"19 1","pages":"79 - 113"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A variationist perspective on the comparative complexity of four registers at the intersection of mode and formality\",\"authors\":\"Benedikt Szmrecsanyi, Alexandra Engel\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/cllt-2022-0031\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract In this paper, we operationalize register differences at the intersection of formality and mode, and distinguish four broad register categories: spoken informal (conversations), spoken formal (parliamentary debates), written informal (blogs), and written formal (newspaper articles). We are specifically interested in the comparative probabilistic/variationist complexity of these registers – when speakers have grammatical choices, are the probabilistic grammars regulating these choices more or less complex in particular registers than in others? Based on multivariate modeling of richly annotated datasets covering three grammatical alternations in two languages (English and Dutch), we assess the complexity of probabilistic grammars by drawing on three criteria: (a) the number of constraints on variant choice, (b) the number of interactions between constraints, and (c) the relative importance of lexical conditioning. Analysis shows that contrary to theorizing in variationist sociolinguistics, probabilistic complexity differences between registers are not quantitatively simple: formal registers are consistently the most complex ones, while spoken registers are the least complex ones. The most complex register under study is written-formal quality newspaper writing. We submit that the complexity differentials we uncover are a function of acquisitional difficulty, of on-line processing limitations, and of normative pressures.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45605,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"79 - 113\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2022-0031\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2022-0031","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

摘要在本文中,我们在形式和模式的交叉点上操作语域差异,并区分了四大语域类别:口语非正式(对话)、口语正式(议会辩论)、书面非正式(博客)和书面正式(报纸文章)。我们特别感兴趣的是这些语域的相对概率/变元复杂性——当说话者有语法选择时,在特定的语域中,规范这些选择的概率语法是否比其他语域更复杂?基于对两种语言(英语和荷兰语)中涵盖三种语法变化的丰富注释数据集的多元建模,我们通过以下三个标准来评估概率语法的复杂性:(a)变体选择的约束数量,(b)约束之间的相互作用数量,以及(c)词汇条件反射的相对重要性。分析表明,与变元社会语言学的理论相反,语域之间的概率复杂性差异在数量上并不简单:正式语域始终是最复杂的语域,而口语语域则是最不复杂的。所研究的最复杂的语域是正式质量的报纸写作。我们认为,我们发现的复杂性差异是获取难度、在线处理限制和规范压力的函数。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A variationist perspective on the comparative complexity of four registers at the intersection of mode and formality
Abstract In this paper, we operationalize register differences at the intersection of formality and mode, and distinguish four broad register categories: spoken informal (conversations), spoken formal (parliamentary debates), written informal (blogs), and written formal (newspaper articles). We are specifically interested in the comparative probabilistic/variationist complexity of these registers – when speakers have grammatical choices, are the probabilistic grammars regulating these choices more or less complex in particular registers than in others? Based on multivariate modeling of richly annotated datasets covering three grammatical alternations in two languages (English and Dutch), we assess the complexity of probabilistic grammars by drawing on three criteria: (a) the number of constraints on variant choice, (b) the number of interactions between constraints, and (c) the relative importance of lexical conditioning. Analysis shows that contrary to theorizing in variationist sociolinguistics, probabilistic complexity differences between registers are not quantitatively simple: formal registers are consistently the most complex ones, while spoken registers are the least complex ones. The most complex register under study is written-formal quality newspaper writing. We submit that the complexity differentials we uncover are a function of acquisitional difficulty, of on-line processing limitations, and of normative pressures.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
12.50%
发文量
15
期刊介绍: Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory (CLLT) is a peer-reviewed journal publishing high-quality original corpus-based research focusing on theoretically relevant issues in all core areas of linguistic research, or other recognized topic areas. It provides a forum for researchers from different theoretical backgrounds and different areas of interest that share a commitment to the systematic and exhaustive analysis of naturally occurring language. Contributions from all theoretical frameworks are welcome but they should be addressed at a general audience and thus be explicit about their assumptions and discovery procedures and provide sufficient theoretical background to be accessible to researchers from different frameworks. Topics Corpus Linguistics Quantitative Linguistics Phonology Morphology Semantics Syntax Pragmatics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信