外借形容词的谓语和标记性偏误

IF 0.1 4区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Marlieke Shaw, Hendrik De Smet
{"title":"外借形容词的谓语和标记性偏误","authors":"Marlieke Shaw, Hendrik De Smet","doi":"10.51814/nm.114021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Previous research on loan word accommodation has shown that English‑origin verbs in Present‑day Dutch and French‑origin verbs in Late Middle English are subject to usage biases. In both language‑contact settings, loan verbs are disproportionally frequent in non‑finite and morphologically unmarked forms as compared to native verbs. The present study demonstrates that accommodation biases are also found in loan adjectives. Concretely, loan adjectives are more prevalent in predicative than in attributive syntactic position as compared to native adjectives (predicative bias), and they are more prevalent in uninflected than in inflected forms (markedness bias). The predicative bias is found to rank stronger than the markedness bias, which is consistent with the findings for verbs. Additionally, biases are more pronounced in the French‑Middle English than in the English‑Dutch contact setting. The findings indicate that direct insertion of loan-words, despite being the cross-linguistically most frequent strategy for loan word integration, is not free of obstacles, possibly due to processing costs specifically associated with loan words.","PeriodicalId":43379,"journal":{"name":"NEUPHILOLOGISCHE MITTEILUNGEN","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Predicative and markedness bias in loan adjectives\",\"authors\":\"Marlieke Shaw, Hendrik De Smet\",\"doi\":\"10.51814/nm.114021\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Previous research on loan word accommodation has shown that English‑origin verbs in Present‑day Dutch and French‑origin verbs in Late Middle English are subject to usage biases. In both language‑contact settings, loan verbs are disproportionally frequent in non‑finite and morphologically unmarked forms as compared to native verbs. The present study demonstrates that accommodation biases are also found in loan adjectives. Concretely, loan adjectives are more prevalent in predicative than in attributive syntactic position as compared to native adjectives (predicative bias), and they are more prevalent in uninflected than in inflected forms (markedness bias). The predicative bias is found to rank stronger than the markedness bias, which is consistent with the findings for verbs. Additionally, biases are more pronounced in the French‑Middle English than in the English‑Dutch contact setting. The findings indicate that direct insertion of loan-words, despite being the cross-linguistically most frequent strategy for loan word integration, is not free of obstacles, possibly due to processing costs specifically associated with loan words.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43379,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"NEUPHILOLOGISCHE MITTEILUNGEN\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"NEUPHILOLOGISCHE MITTEILUNGEN\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.51814/nm.114021\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"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":"NEUPHILOLOGISCHE MITTEILUNGEN","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51814/nm.114021","RegionNum":4,"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: 0

摘要

以往关于外来词适应的研究表明,现代荷兰语中的英语源动词和中古晚期英语中的法语源动词存在使用偏差。在这两种语言接触环境中,与母语动词相比,借用动词在非限定和形态上没有标记的形式中出现的频率不成比例。本研究表明,在借调形容词中也存在迁就倾向。具体来说,与本地形容词相比,借词形容词在谓语句法位置上比在定语句法位置上更普遍(谓语偏误),它们在未屈折形式下比在屈折形式下更普遍(标记偏误)。谓语偏倚比标记偏倚更强,这与动词的研究结果一致。此外,偏见在法语-中古英语中比在英语-荷兰语接触环境中更为明显。研究结果表明,尽管外来词是跨语言整合中最常见的策略,但直接插入外来词并非没有障碍,可能是因为外来词的处理成本特别高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Predicative and markedness bias in loan adjectives
Previous research on loan word accommodation has shown that English‑origin verbs in Present‑day Dutch and French‑origin verbs in Late Middle English are subject to usage biases. In both language‑contact settings, loan verbs are disproportionally frequent in non‑finite and morphologically unmarked forms as compared to native verbs. The present study demonstrates that accommodation biases are also found in loan adjectives. Concretely, loan adjectives are more prevalent in predicative than in attributive syntactic position as compared to native adjectives (predicative bias), and they are more prevalent in uninflected than in inflected forms (markedness bias). The predicative bias is found to rank stronger than the markedness bias, which is consistent with the findings for verbs. Additionally, biases are more pronounced in the French‑Middle English than in the English‑Dutch contact setting. The findings indicate that direct insertion of loan-words, despite being the cross-linguistically most frequent strategy for loan word integration, is not free of obstacles, possibly due to processing costs specifically associated with loan words.
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
NEUPHILOLOGISCHE MITTEILUNGEN
NEUPHILOLOGISCHE MITTEILUNGEN LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS-
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
50.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
40 weeks
×
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