The sequencing of adverbia clauses of time in academic English : Random forest modelling of conditional inference trees

• Autorzy: Rezaee A. A. , Golparvar S. E.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.15398/jlm.v4i2.131

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Adverbial clauses of time are positioned either before or after their associated main clauses. This study aims to assess the importance of discourse-pragmatics and processing-related constraints on the positioning of adverbial clauses of time in research articles of applied linguistics written by authors for whom English is considered a native language. Previous research has revealed that the ordering is co-determined by various factors from the domains of semantics and discourse-pragmatics (bridging, iconicity, and subordinator) and language processing (deranking, length, and complexity). This research conducts a multifactorial analysis on the motivators of the positioning of adverbial clauses of time in 100 research articles of applied linguistics. The study will use a random forest of conditional inferencje trees as the statistical technique to measure the weights of the aforementioned variables. It was found that iconicity and bridging, chich are factors associated with discourse and semantics, are the two most salient predictors of clause ordering.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

positioning; semantics; processing; iconicity

• Wydawca: Instytut Podstaw Informatyki PAN
• Czasopismo: Journal of Language Modelling
• Rocznik: 2016
• Tom: Vol. 4, No. 2
• Strony: 225--244
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 39 poz., rys., tab., wykr.

Twórcy

autor

Rezaee A. A.

• University of Tehran, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran

autor

Golparvar S. E.

• University of Tehran, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran

Bibliografia

• [1] Bas Aarts (1988), Clauses of concession in written present-day British English, Journal of English Linguistics, 21 (1): 39-58.
• [2] Jennifer E. Arnold, Anthony Losongco, Thomas Wasow, and Ryan Ginstrom (2000), Heaviness vs. newness: The effects of structural complexity and discourse status on constituent ordering, Language, 76 (1): 28-55.
• [3] Douglas. Biber, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad, and Edward Finegan (1999), Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English, Longman, London, http://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/1275/.
• [4] Betty J. Birner and Gregory Ward (1998), Information Status and Noncanonical Word Order in English, number 40 in Studies in Language Companion Series, John Benjamins Publishing Company.
• [5] Leo Breiman (2001), Random forests, Machine Learning, 45 (1): 5-32.
• [6] Wallace Chafe (1984), How people use adverbial clauses, in Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics, pp. 437-449, Linguistic Society of America.
• [7] Eve V. Clark (1971), On the acquisition of the meaning of before and after, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 10 (3): 266-275, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022537171800543.
• [8] Sonia Cristofaro (2003), Subordination, Oxford Studies in Typology and Linguistic Theory, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
• [9] William Croft (2003), Radical Construction Theory: Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2nd edition.
• [10] Holger Diessel (1996), Processing factors of pre-and postposed adverbia clauses, in Proceedings of the 22th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, pp. 71-82, Linguistic Society of America.
• [11] Holger Diessel (2001), The ordering distribution of main and adverbia clauses: A typological study, Language, 77 (3): 433-455.
• [12] Holger Diessel (2005), Competing motivations for the ordering of main and adverbial clauses, Linguistics, 43 (3): 449-470.
• [13] Holger Diessel (2008), Iconicity of sequence: A corpus-based analysis of the positioning of temporal adverbial clauses in English, Cognitive Linguistics, 19 (3): 465-490.
• [14] Stephen Evans and Christopher Green (2007), Why EAP is necessary: A survey of Hong Kong tertiary students, Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6 (1): 3-17.
• [15] Cecilia E. Ford (1993), Grammar in Interaction: Adverbial Clauses in American English Conversations, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
• [16] Edward Gibson (1998), Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies, Cognition, 68 (1): 1-76, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(98)00034-1.
• [17] Edward Gibson (2000), The Dependency Locality Theory : A distance-based theory of linguistic complexity, in Alec P. Marantz, Yasushi Miyashita, and Wayne O’Neil, editors, Image, Language, Brain, pp. 95-126, MIT Press.
• [18] Talmy Givón (2001), Syntax: Introduction, volume 2, John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam and Philadelphia.
• [19] Talmy Givón (2011), Ute Reference Grammar, volume 3 of Culture and Language Use, John Benjamins Publishing.
• [20] Joseph H. Greenberg (1963), Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements, in Joseph H. Greenberg, editor, Universals of language, volume 2, pp. 73-113, MIT Press.
• [21] John Haiman (1983), Iconic and economic motivation, Language, 59 (4): 781-819, http://www.jstor.org/stable/413373.
• [22] John Haiman (2015), Iconicity in linguistics, in James D. Wright, editor, International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, Elsevier, Oxford, second edition.
• [23] John A. Hawkins (1994), A Performance Theory of Order and Constituency, volume 73 of Cambridge Studies in Linguistics, Cambridge University Press.
• [24] John A. Hawkins (2004), Efficiency and Complexity in Grammars, Oxford University Press, http://tocs.ub.uni-mainz.de/pdfs/125604661.pdf.
• [25] Torsten Hothorn, Kurt Hornik, and Achim Zeileis (2006), Unbiased recursive partitioning: A conditional inference framework, Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 15 (3): 651-674.
• [26] John M. Kirk (1997), Subordinate clauses in English, Journal of English Linguistics, 25 (4): 349-364.
• [27] Ming Li and Paul Vitányi (1997), An Introduction to Kolmogorov Complexity and its Applications, Graduate Texts in Computer Science, Springer Verlag, 2nd edition.
• [28] Àngels Llanes and Carmen Muñoz (2009), A short stay abroad: Does it make a difference?, System, 37 (3): 353-365.
• [29] Matti Miestamo (2004), On the feasibility of complexity metrics, in FinEst Linguistics: Proceedings of the Annual Finnish and Estonian Conference of Linguistics, pp. 11-26, Tallinn University Press.
• [30] Keisuke Ohtsuka and William F. Brewer (1992), Discourse organization in the comprehension of temporal order in narrative texts, Discourse Processes, 15 (3): 317-336.
• [31] Randolph Quirk, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik (1985), A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language, Longman, London.
• [32] Leon Stassen (1985), Comparison and Universal Grammar, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
• [33] Caroline Strobl, Anne-Laure Boulesteix, Achim Zeileis, and Torsten Hothorn (2007), Bias in random forest variable importance measures: Illustrations, sources and a solution, BMC Bioinformatics, 8 (1), http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2105/8/25.
• [34] Sali A. Tagliamonte and R. Harald Baayen (2012), Models, forests, and trees of York English: Was/were variation as a case study for statistical practice, Language Variation and Change, 24 (02): 135-178.
• [35] Sandra A. Thompson, Robert A. Longacre, and Shin Ja J. Hwang (2007), Adverbial clauses, in Timothy Shopen, editor, Language Typology and Syntactic Description, pp. 237-300, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
• [36] Jean-Christophe Verstraete (2004), Initial and final position for adverbia clauses in English: The constructional basis of the discursive and syntactic differences, Linguistics, 42 (4): 819-853.
• [37] Relja Vulanovic (2007), On measuring language complexity as relative to the conveyed linguistic information, SKY Journal of Linguistics, 20: 399-427.
• [38] Thomas Wasow (2002), Postverbal Behavior, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA.
• [39] Daniel Wiechmann and Elma Kerz (2013), The positioning of concessive adverbial clauses in English: Assessing the importance of discourse-pragmatic and processing-based constraints, English Language and Linguistics, 17 (01): 1-23.