Language production experiments as tools for corpus construction: A contrastive study of complementizer agreement

IF 1 2区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory Pub Date : 2020-09-10 DOI:10.1515/cllt-2019-0075
Matthias Fingerhuth, L. Breuer
{"title":"Language production experiments as tools for corpus construction: A contrastive study of complementizer agreement","authors":"Matthias Fingerhuth, L. Breuer","doi":"10.1515/cllt-2019-0075","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The investigation of linguistic phenomena in corpora of spontaneous speech is sometimes hindered by corpus size or by the complexity of the factors influencing their occurrence. Language Production Experiments (LPEs) can specifically elicit such phenomena and can therefore be used to build corpora that allow for their investigation. Yet experiments are a wide category that covers very different tasks, and there is little empirical research that compares speakers’ response behavior to different task types. In this paper, we compare the responses of a group of 22 speakers to a translation task and a completion task, both of which target the syntactic phenomena complementizer agreement (CA). The results indicate that both experimental methods offer legitimate ways to investigate the phenomenon with specific advantages and disadvantages. However, a comparison of results from both tasks allows for insights that a single task could not have provided.","PeriodicalId":45605,"journal":{"name":"Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory","volume":"18 1","pages":"237 - 262"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/cllt-2019-0075","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2019-0075","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Abstract The investigation of linguistic phenomena in corpora of spontaneous speech is sometimes hindered by corpus size or by the complexity of the factors influencing their occurrence. Language Production Experiments (LPEs) can specifically elicit such phenomena and can therefore be used to build corpora that allow for their investigation. Yet experiments are a wide category that covers very different tasks, and there is little empirical research that compares speakers’ response behavior to different task types. In this paper, we compare the responses of a group of 22 speakers to a translation task and a completion task, both of which target the syntactic phenomena complementizer agreement (CA). The results indicate that both experimental methods offer legitimate ways to investigate the phenomenon with specific advantages and disadvantages. However, a comparison of results from both tasks allows for insights that a single task could not have provided.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
作为语料库构建工具的语言生成实验:补语一致性的对比研究
摘要自发言语语料库中语言现象的研究有时会受到语料库大小或影响其发生因素复杂性的阻碍。语言生产实验(LPE)可以专门引出这样的现象,因此可以用来构建语料库,以便对其进行研究。然而,实验是一个涵盖非常不同任务的广泛类别,很少有实证研究比较说话者对不同任务类型的反应行为。在本文中,我们比较了一组22名说话者对翻译任务和完成任务的反应,这两项任务都针对句法现象补语者一致性(CA)。结果表明,这两种实验方法都为研究这一现象提供了合法的方法,有其特定的优点和缺点。然而,对两项任务的结果进行比较可以获得单个任务无法提供的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
12.50%
发文量
15
期刊介绍: Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory (CLLT) is a peer-reviewed journal publishing high-quality original corpus-based research focusing on theoretically relevant issues in all core areas of linguistic research, or other recognized topic areas. It provides a forum for researchers from different theoretical backgrounds and different areas of interest that share a commitment to the systematic and exhaustive analysis of naturally occurring language. Contributions from all theoretical frameworks are welcome but they should be addressed at a general audience and thus be explicit about their assumptions and discovery procedures and provide sufficient theoretical background to be accessible to researchers from different frameworks. Topics Corpus Linguistics Quantitative Linguistics Phonology Morphology Semantics Syntax Pragmatics.
期刊最新文献
The red dress is cute: why subjective adjectives are more often predicative A corpus-based study on semantic and cognitive features of bei sentences in Mandarin Chinese Verb influence on French wh-placement: a parallel corpus study Idiosyncratic entrenchment: tracing change in constructional schematicity with nested random effects Transfer five ways: applications of multiple distinctive collexeme analysis to the dative alternation in Mandarin Chinese
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1