Publications

Abstract

In an online experiment among native speakers of Dutch we measured addressees' responses to emails written in the informal pronoun T or the formal pronoun V in HR communication. 172 participants (61 male, mean age 37 years) read either the V-versions or the T-versions of two invitation emails and two rejection emails by four different fictitious recruiters. After each email, participants had to score their appreciation of the company and the recruiter on five different scales each, such as The recruiter who wrote this email seems … [scale from friendly to unfriendly]. We hypothesized that (i) the V-pronoun would be more appreciated in letters of rejection, and the T-pronoun in letters of invitation, and (ii) older people would appreciate the V-pronoun more than the T-pronoun, and the other way around for younger people. Although neither of these hypotheses was supported, we did find a small effect of pronoun: Emails written in V were more highly appreciated than emails in T, irrespective of type of email (invitation or rejection), and irrespective of the participant's age, gender, and level of education. At the same time, we observed differences in the strength of this effect across different scales.

Abstract

All living beings try to save effort, and humans are no exception. This groundbreaking book shows how we save time and energy during communication by unconsciously making efficient choices in grammar, lexicon and phonology. It presents a new theory of 'communicative efficiency', the idea that language is designed to be as efficient as possible, as a system of communication. The new framework accounts for the diverse manifestations of communicative efficiency across a typologically broad range of languages, using various corpus-based and statistical approaches to explain speakers' bias towards efficiency. The author's unique interdisciplinary expertise allows her to provide rich evidence from a broad range of language sciences. She integrates diverse insights from over a hundred years of research into this comprehensible new theory, which she presents step-by-step in clear and accessible language. It is essential reading for language scientists, cognitive scientists and anyone interested in language use and communication.

Abstract

This article argues for a gradient approach to word order, which treats word order preferences, both within and across languages, as a continuous variable. Word order variability should be regarded as a basic assumption, rather than as something exceptional. Although this approach follows naturally from the emergentist usage-based view of language, we argue that it can be beneficial for all frameworks and linguistic domains, including language acquisition, processing, typology, language contact, language evolution and change, and formal approaches. Gradient approaches have been very fruitful in some domains, such as language processing, but their potential is not fully realized yet. This may be due to practical reasons. We discuss the most pressing methodological challenges in corpus-based and experimental research of word order and propose some practical solutions.

Abstract

Word classes play a central role in corpus linguistics under the name of parts of speech (POS). Many popular corpora are provided with POS tags. This chapter gives examples of popular tagsets and discusses the methods of automatic tagging. It also considers bottom-up approaches to POS induction, which are particularly important for the ‘poverty of stimulus’ debate in language acquisition research. The choice of optimal POS tagging involves many difficult decisions, which are related to the level of granularity, redundancy at different levels of corpus annotation, cross-linguistic applicability, language-specific descriptive adequacy, and dealing with fuzzy boundaries between POS. The chapter also discusses the problem of flexible word classes and demonstrates how corpus data with POS tags and syntactic dependencies can be used to quantify the level of flexibility in a language.

Abstract

The paper demonstrates how verb and noun classes can be used as a common interface in contrastive Construction Grammar. It presents an innovative approach to the contrastive analysis of constructional spaces (sets of constructions covering a certain semantic domain). We compare English and Dutch analytic causatives by using the statistical technique of multiple correspondence analysis applied to data from large monolingual corpora. The method allows us to explore the common conceptual space of the constructions, in particular the salient semantic dimensions and causation types, which emerge on the basis of co-occurring semantic classes of the nominal and verbal slot fillers in constructional exemplars. The formal patterns of the constructions at different levels of specificity are projected onto this space. Our analyses show that an average Dutch analytic causative refers to more indirect and abstract causation with fewer animate than its English counterpart. We have also found that the languages “cut” the common conceptual space in unique ways, although the semantic areas of many English and Dutch constructions overlap substantially. Nevertheless, the form-meaning mapping in the two languages displays commonalities. Both English and Dutch constructions with prepositionally marked or implicit causees are strongly associated with animate causees. We have also observed a correlation between the directness of causation and the crosslinguistic hierarchy of affectedness marking proposed by Kemmer and Verhagen (1994).

Abstract

The integration of three main dimensions of linguistic usage and variation – formal, social and conceptual – can be seen as a major ambition of the Cognitive Sociolinguistics enterprise. The paper illustrates this theoretical approach with a corpus-based study of near-synonymous causative constructions with doen and laten in the Belgian and Netherlandic varieties of Dutch. A series of quantitative analyses show a complex interplay of the dimensions at different levels of constructional schematicity. At the more schematic level, the results indicate that the effects of transitivity and coreferentiality on the probability of the two constructions are slightly different in the two varieties. However, incorporating the effected predicate slot fillers in a mixed-effect model reveals that these differences can be explained to a large extent by the country-specific lexical patterns. These findings suggest that the interplay of the lectal and conceptual factors in constructional variation should be studied at varying degrees of constructional schematicity.