Beyond the Lemma: Inflection-Specific Constructions in English

1. Beyond the Lemma:Inflection-Specific Constructions in English Sally Rice and John Newman University of Alberta AACL 2008 BYU 14 March 2008

2. Bertrand Russell’s Emotive Conjugations I’mtenacious you’restubborn he’spigheaded singular 1 2 3

3. inflection-specific meaning and behavior (idiosyncracies of meaning, form, collocation, genre, and distribution)

4. Form Idiosyncracies in a TypicalAthapaskan Verb Paradigm

5. Form Idiosyncracies in another TypicalAthapaskan Verb Paradigm

6. TAM-Based Idiosyncracies of some Basic Verbs Rice & Newman 2005

7. SUBJ x TAM Idiosyncracies in BNCallRice & Newman 2005 GO

8. SUBJ x TAM Idiosyncracies in BNCallRice & Newman 2005 GO

9. SUBJ x TAM Idiosyncracies in BNCCCRice & Newman 2005 THINK

10. SUBJ x TAM Idiosyncracies in BNCCCRice & Newman 2005 THINK

11. VVB-base VVZ-3sg.pres VVI-inf VVD-past VVG-prog VVN-perf part rid allow

12. Inflectional idiosyncracies of EAT and DRINKNewman & Rice 2003

13. Distributional idiosyncracies of A, Aer, AestNewman & Rice 2006

14. Distributional idiosyncracies of A, Aer, AestNewman & Rice 2006

15. Distributional idiosyncracies of A, Aer, AestNewman & Rice 2006

16. Collocational idiosyncracies of A, Aer, AestNewman & Rice 2006

17. Collocational idiosyncracies of A, Aer, AestNewman & Rice 2006

18. Really idiosyncratic gradable As

19. Really idiosyncratic gradable As

20. inflection-specific meaning and behavior (idiosyncracies of meaning, form, collocation, genre, and distribution)  Commitment to usage-based approaches like CG, RCG language-specific construction-specific inflection-specific Application of corpus linguistic methodologies and mindset

21. Inflectional Islands Syntactic (constructional), semantic, and collocational properties tend to inhere in individual inflections of a lexical item in a register-specific manner. These properties may not extend across all the inflections (the paradigm) to characterize the lemma as a whole.

22. English Pronominal Inflection searched BNC and CAE with Mark Davies’ corpus tool: Variation in English Words and Phrases: http://view.byu.edu tracked person & case distribution/skew for pronouns examined frequencies and collocations

23. English Pronominal Inflection NOM ACC/ POSS IND REFLEX OBL DET POSS 1SGI me my mine myself 2 you you your yours yourself/ves 3SG.M he him his his himself 3SG.F she her her hers herself 3SG.N it it its its itself 1PL we us our ours ourself/ves 3PL they them their theirs themself/ves

24. English Pronominal Inflection NOM ACC/ POSS IND REFLEX OBL DET POSS 1SGI me my mine myself 2 you you your yours yourself/ves 3SG.M he him his his himself 3SG.F she her her hers herself 3SG.N it it its its itself 1PL we us our ours ourself/ves 3PL they them their theirs themself/ves

28. English Pronominal Inflection NOM ACC/ POSS IND REFLEX OBL DET POSS 1SGI me my mine myself 2 you you your yours yourself/ves 3SG.M he him his his himself 3SG.F she her her hers herself 3SG.N it it its its itself 1PL we us our ours ourself/ves 3PL they them their theirs themself/ves

29. Top 20 Collocates for Pro + V (=NOM)

30. Top 20 Collocates for Pro + V (=NOM)

31. Percent Attraction of Pro to Pro + CAN Frame Attraction of “he” = (no. of “he+CAN” in construction over total no. of “he” in corpus) x100, following Schmid 2000)

32. Percent Attraction of Pro to Pro + WILL Frame Attraction of “he” = (no. of “he+WILL” in construction over total no. of “he” in corpus) x100, following Schmid 2000)

33. Collostructional Analysis of 3SG + CAN/WILL Collostructional analysis based on attraction/repulsion of “she/he/it” to the construction “Pro + CAN” or “Pro + WILL” [size of corpus = number of verbs (V*)]; Stefanowitsch & Gries 2003

34. PRO like to vs. PRO hope to (BNC-cc) you like to I hope to

35. PRO like to vs. PRO hope to (BNC-cc) you like to I hope to

36. English Pronominal Inflection NOM ACC/ POSS IND REFLEX OBL DET POSS 1SGI me my mine myself 2 you you your yours yourself/ves 3SG.M he him his his himself 3SG.F she her her hers herself 3SG.N it it its its itself 1PL we us our ours ourself/ves 3PL they them their theirs themself/ves

37. Top 20 Collocates for V + Pro (=ACC?)

38. Top 20 Collocates for V + Pro (=ACC?)

39. Top 20 Collocates for V + Pro (=ACC?)

40. Top 20 Collocates for V + Pro (=ACC?)

41. Top 10 Collocates for P + Pro (=OBL)

42. Top 10 Collocates for P + Pro (=OBL)

43. Distributional Idiosyncracies (CAEall+ BNCall) prep + PRO Reliance of “to+me” (= no. of “to+me” in corpus over total no. of PREP+PRO in corpus) x100, following Schmid 2000)

44. English Pronominal Inflection NOM ACC/ POSS IND REFLEX OBL DET POSS 1SGI me my mine myself 2 you you your yours yourself/ves 3SG.M he him his his himself 3SG.F she her her hers herself 3SG.N it it its its itself 1PL we us our ours ourself/ves 3PL they them their theirs themself/ves

45. Top 20 Collocates for Pro’s NP (=GEN)

46. Distributional Idiosyncracies (AECall+ BNCall) my KINTERM Reliance of “my+mother” (= no. of “my+mother” in corpus over total no. of PRO.POSS+NN* in corpus) x100, following Schmid 2000)

47. 3SG Distributional Idiosyncracies (BNCall)

48. 1SG Distributional Idiosyncracies by Genre

49. 1PL Distributional Idiosyncracies by Genre

50. Our Manifesto de-lemmatize! inflected forms have a life of their own (Tao 2001, 2003) put lemmas aside (as done earlier with syntactic rule in favor of constructions) substitute words-in-context or WICs (intersection of genre, register, & inflection) aim low! find the “hierarchy of lower-level structures...[that] specify the actual array of subcases and specific instances that support and give rise to the higher-level generalization” RWL, Concept, Image, & Symbol, 1991:281-282