2012
DOI: 10.1017/s0954394512000154
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Grammatical relation probability: How usage patterns shape analogy

Abstract: It has been argued speakers' knowledge of the probabilities of certain phones, words, and syntactic structures affects language production (Bell, Brenier, Gregory, Girand, & Jurafsky, 2009; Tily, Gahl, Arnon, Snider, Kothari, & Bresnan, 2009). This study provides evidence for effects of grammatical relation probabilities by identifying significant effects on verb morphology in the Spanish presentative [haber ‘there (be)’+ NP] construction stemming from nouns with varying proportion of use in subject fu… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
26
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
1
26
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This is what has happened, or is currently happening, in the haveexistential construction in central Catalan dialects (Rigau 1997: 403) In these Spanish dialects, haber agrees with the sole nominal phrase of the existential construction, in an agreement pattern that co-exists alongside with the standard and more generalized invariant lack of agreement (see § 2). This change has been analysed as the result of the reanalysis of the pivot as subject (Waltereit andDetges 2008, Brown &Rivas 2012), although for other scholars the ability of the pivot to control agreement does not necessarily make it a subject (Rodríguez Mondoñedo 2006). Under the analysis defended here, the pivot functions as the predicate of the existential proposition.…”
Section: Patterns Of Variation In Existential Constructionsmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This is what has happened, or is currently happening, in the haveexistential construction in central Catalan dialects (Rigau 1997: 403) In these Spanish dialects, haber agrees with the sole nominal phrase of the existential construction, in an agreement pattern that co-exists alongside with the standard and more generalized invariant lack of agreement (see § 2). This change has been analysed as the result of the reanalysis of the pivot as subject (Waltereit andDetges 2008, Brown &Rivas 2012), although for other scholars the ability of the pivot to control agreement does not necessarily make it a subject (Rodríguez Mondoñedo 2006). Under the analysis defended here, the pivot functions as the predicate of the existential proposition.…”
Section: Patterns Of Variation In Existential Constructionsmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Cases of agreement with HABERE have been reported for the Francoprovençal dialect spoken in Celle di San Vito, in Puglia (Manzini and Savoia 2005: III, 66), and for central Catalan dialects (Rigau 1997). In addition, in several varieties of Spanish, existentials are undergoing a grammatical change whereby haber has started to agree with the pivot (see Rodríguez Mondoñedo 2006, Brown andRivas 2012, and references therein). I will return to these exceptional cases of agreement in have-existentials in section 5.…”
Section: Patterns Of Variation In Existential Constructionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, Brown and Rivas (2012) have shown that speakers pluralize haber more often when the noun is frequently used as subject in Spanish generally. Rivas and Brown (2012), on the other hand, have argued that singular haber is more common with 'stage-level' NPs (nouns that refer to events or entities that can be imagined as having a beginning and an end; e.g., barrios 'rough neighboorhoods' in example 13), whereas pluralized haber tends to co-occur with 'individual-level' NPs (nouns that refer to entities that have no perceivable beginning or end; e.g., características 'characteristics' in example 14).…”
Section: Markedness Of Codingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Further paired t tests revealed that the interaction was due to the fact that the Experiment effect was larger on the Repeated noun [164 ms; t 1 (62) = −4.12, p < 0.001; t 2 (78) = −13.58, p < 0.001] than in the Pronoun anaphora [39 ms; t 1 (62) = −1.15, p > 0.25; t 2 (78) = −18.99, p < 0.001]. However, it is known that besides lexical frequency the context of use of lexical items plays a significant role during language comprehension (Gahl and Garnsey 2006;Brown and Rivas 2012). In order to make sure that the reported effects were due to the lexical frequency of the nouns used in the experiments rather than to the frequency they occur in a given syntactic context (subject vs. object), we performed a comparison based on GOOGLE where we contrasted the occurrence of the nouns in subject and object positions with the verbs used in both experiments (i.e.…”
Section: Cross-experiments Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Also, linguistic performance of brain damaged patients is determined by word frequency, as reflected by the fact that high-frequency words are preserved more often in comparison to low-frequency words (e.g., Dell 1990;Knobel et al 2008). In addition, speakers tend to experience less tip-of-the-tongue states with high-frequency words than with low-frequency words (e.g., Brown 2012). Although all these observations clearly suggest an advantage in the processing for high-frequency words compared to low-frequency words; it remains still unclear whether this is also the case during anaphor resolution.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%