Variation in agreement: A lexical feature-based approach

Adger, David; Smith, Jennifer

doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2008.05.007

Cited by 122 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Formal syntactic theory and variationist sociolinguistics are often depicted as somewhat incompatible "opposites", because of their respective focus on linguistic competence and general linguistic principles on the one hand, versus performance and variability on the other (Wilson and Henry 1998). However, recent studies have advocated bridging the gap between the two in analysing morpho-syntactic variation and change (Wilson and Henry 1998;Adger and Smith 2005;2010;Cornips and Corrigan 2005a;b;Adger and Trousdale 2007;Buchstaller et al 2013;Burnett et al under review), with Barbiers (2005: 235) suggesting that "it is the task of sociolinguists to describe and explain the patterns of variation that occur within a linguistic community given the theoretical limits of this variation uncovered by generative linguistics [emphasis mine]". This paper takes such an approach and argues that integrating formal theory into variationist analysis of morpho-syntactic variation allows for: (i) more careful delimitation of the linguistic variable and its contexts, taking into consideration the constraints of the grammar; (ii) theoretically-informed decision-making as to the inclusion and exclusion of tokens; and (iii) using production data to test hypotheses that can elucidate how variants are derived from the grammar.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating syntactic theory and variationist analysis: The structure of negative indefinites in regional dialects of British English

Childs

2017

Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper integrates syntactic theory and variationist analysis in an investigation of the variation between English not-negation (I don't have any money), no-negation (I have no money) and negative concord (I don't have no money). Using corpora of three varieties of UK English spoken in Glasgow, Tyneside and Salford respectively, I test two theoretical accounts of the variation. Account 1 applies Zeijlstra's (2004) agreement-based theory of negative concord to all three variants, such that n-words (e.g. nobody) which feature in no-negation and negative concord are not inherently negative but agree with a negative operator in a higher NegP. Under Account 2, no-negation is instead derived via negative-marking within the DP followed by movement to the higher NegP for sentential scope (Kayne 1998; Svenonius 2002; Zeijlstra 2011). These accounts, together with observations about the raising properties of functional versus lexical verbs, lead to the formulation of different hypotheses about the distribution of variants in speech according to verb type, verb phrase complexity, and the discourse status of the propositions expressed. Results of distributional analysis and mixed-effects modelling support Account 2 of the variation over Account 1, suggesting structural identity between not-negation and negative concord (in contrast to no-negation). This supports Tubau's (2016) proposal that English negative indefinites have two distinct structures: one in which negation is marked syntactically in the DP and one in which they agree with a syntactically-higher NegP.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating syntactic theory and variationist analysis: The structure of negative indefinites in regional dialects of British English

Childs

2017

Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The dialogue between them is still marginal although it had some upswing since the nineties in the former century especially through publications by Kroch (2001), Wilson & Henry (1998), Hudson (1995), Cornips & Corrigan (2005), Adger & Smith (2010) and many more etc. Recently, sociolinguists and generativists have combined their expertise in studies about the phenomenon of micro-variation but in the end the questions posed by both and their research interests are too different.…”

Section: In Your Opinion What Are the Contributions Of Dialectology mentioning

confidence: 99%

An interview on linguistic variation with Leonie Cornips

Cornips

2015

isogloss

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. She is a researcher in variationist linguistics and has extensively worked on the morphosyntactic variation in new varieties of Dutch, but also on bilingualism, bilingual acquisition and idiolects. Her work includes a wide range of morphosyntactic topics as gender, aspectual markers, argument structure and verbal clusters. Her most recent research projects deal with vocabulary acquisition by young bidialectal children and their cognitive developments and the construction of social and local identities through language practices in the Dutch province of Limburg.From your perspective, what are the relevant levels of abstractness to approach the Faculty of Language? The standard ones (namely "language", "dialect" and "idiolect")? Others? I'm working within the variationist sociolinguistics paradigm. According to Labov (2010), "the central dogma of sociolinguistics (is) that the community is conceptually and analytically prior to the individual. This means that in linguistic analysis, the behavior of an individual can be understood only through the study of the social groups of which he or she is a member. Following the approach outlined in Weinreich et al. 1968, language is seen as an abstract pattern located in the speech community and exterior to the individual. (…) The human language faculty, an evolutionary development rooted in human physiology, is then viewed as the capacity to perceive, reproduce and employ this pattern." In my research, the level of abstractness concerns idiolects and, in particular, syntactic variation located within the idiolect. But the phenomenon of intra-individual variation is always examined in relation to other individuals or groups the speaker identifies with, etc. What are the main advantages / reasons to study linguistic variation?First of all, we cannot study anything else than variation since variation is the essential property of language and it is the Faculty of Language (i.e. the linguistic system, understood as abstract processes and representations) that brings about variation. It is no longer controversial to claim that properties of individual grammars differ. To cite Kayne (1996:xv-xvi): "(…) there must be many more varieties of English than is

show abstract

“…Labov 1972Labov , 1994; but more specifically Eckert 2000Eckert , 2008Silverstein 1985). The attempt to let these two approaches interact with each other (Adger 2006;Adger and Trousdale 2007;Adger and Smith 2010;Corrigan 2005a, 2005b;Wilson and Henry 1998, among many others) should give us insight into how syntactic variation is driven by social factors but constrained by the nature of possible grammars (cf. Wilson and Henry 1998: 82).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The no man’s land between syntax and variationist sociolinguistics: The case of idiolectal variability

Cornips¹

2015

Variation in Language: System- And Usage-Based Approaches

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this paper is to focus on the so-called no man's land where sociolinguistics and grammatical theory interact. It is argued that E-language as a social and I-language as a psychological construct do not exist independently, but influence each other. In other words, syntactic variation and change are driven by social factors but constrained by the nature of possible grammars. The interaction between the social meanings of linguistic forms on the one hand and grammar on the other brings about complex and multi-layered relationships between the individual and the group's or societal grammar. This paper emphasizes how individuals are restricted by grammar but, at the same time, able to overcome these restrictions in specific situated contexts through interactions. This combined approach enables us to predict why some structures are more resistant or vulnerable to syntactic variation and change than others and the route(s) individuals may take to overcome syntactic "restrictions". In this process of interdependent relations between the I-and E-languages, the interpretation and evaluation of linguistic forms through interaction is of crucial importance in the realization of so-called "impossible" or "unrealized" constructions.

show abstract

Variation in agreement: A lexical feature-based approach

Cited by 122 publications

References 12 publications

Integrating syntactic theory and variationist analysis: The structure of negative indefinites in regional dialects of British English

Integrating syntactic theory and variationist analysis: The structure of negative indefinites in regional dialects of British English

An interview on linguistic variation with Leonie Cornips

The no man’s land between syntax and variationist sociolinguistics: The case of idiolectal variability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About