图式与频率/可接受度不匹配:语料库分布预测句子判断

IF 1.8 1区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Cognitive Linguistics Pub Date : 2020-10-28 DOI:10.1515/cog-2020-2040
S. Flach
{"title":"图式与频率/可接受度不匹配:语料库分布预测句子判断","authors":"S. Flach","doi":"10.1515/cog-2020-2040","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract A tight connection between competence and performance is a central tenet of the usage-based model. Methodologically, however, corpus frequency is a poor predictor of acceptability – a phenomenon known as the “frequency/acceptability mismatch”. This article argues that the mismatch arises from a “methodological mismatch”, when simple frequency measures are mapped onto complex grammatical units. To illustrate, we discuss the results of acceptability judgments of go/come-v. The construction is subject to a formal constraint (Go see the doctor! vs. *He goes sees the doctor), which results from its mandative semantics (directives, commissives). While a formal model makes no prediction with regard to gradient acceptability of bare (“grammatical”) go/come-v, the usage-based view assumes that acceptability is a function of compatibility with an abstract schema. The experimental ratings are compared with a number of corpus-derived measures: while acceptability is largely independent of (raw) frequency, it is not independent of frequency-related usage distribution. The results add to recent suggestions that the frequency/acceptability mismatch is substantially reduced if the syntactic complexity of a unit is appropriately captured in usage data.","PeriodicalId":51530,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Linguistics","volume":"31 1","pages":"609 - 645"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/cog-2020-2040","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Schemas and the frequency/acceptability mismatch: Corpus distribution predicts sentence judgments\",\"authors\":\"S. Flach\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/cog-2020-2040\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract A tight connection between competence and performance is a central tenet of the usage-based model. Methodologically, however, corpus frequency is a poor predictor of acceptability – a phenomenon known as the “frequency/acceptability mismatch”. This article argues that the mismatch arises from a “methodological mismatch”, when simple frequency measures are mapped onto complex grammatical units. To illustrate, we discuss the results of acceptability judgments of go/come-v. The construction is subject to a formal constraint (Go see the doctor! vs. *He goes sees the doctor), which results from its mandative semantics (directives, commissives). While a formal model makes no prediction with regard to gradient acceptability of bare (“grammatical”) go/come-v, the usage-based view assumes that acceptability is a function of compatibility with an abstract schema. The experimental ratings are compared with a number of corpus-derived measures: while acceptability is largely independent of (raw) frequency, it is not independent of frequency-related usage distribution. The results add to recent suggestions that the frequency/acceptability mismatch is substantially reduced if the syntactic complexity of a unit is appropriately captured in usage data.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51530,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cognitive Linguistics\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"609 - 645\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-10-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/cog-2020-2040\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cognitive Linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2020-2040\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2020-2040","RegionNum":1,"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: 4

摘要

摘要能力和绩效之间的紧密联系是基于使用的模型的核心原则。然而,在方法论上,语料库频率是可接受性的较差预测指标,这种现象被称为“频率/可接受性不匹配”。这篇文章认为,这种不匹配源于“方法上的不匹配”,即简单的频率测量被映射到复杂的语法单元上。为了说明这一点,我们讨论了go/come-v的可接受性判断结果。该结构受到形式约束(去看医生!vs.*他去看医生),这源于其强制性语义(指令、连词)。虽然形式模型没有预测裸露(“语法”)go/come-v的梯度可接受性,但基于用法的观点认为可接受性是与抽象模式兼容的函数。实验评分与许多语料库衍生的测量结果进行了比较:虽然可接受性在很大程度上独立于(原始)频率,但它并不独立于与频率相关的使用分布。该结果补充了最近的建议,即如果在使用数据中适当地捕捉到单元的句法复杂性,则频率/可接受性失配将显著减少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Schemas and the frequency/acceptability mismatch: Corpus distribution predicts sentence judgments
Abstract A tight connection between competence and performance is a central tenet of the usage-based model. Methodologically, however, corpus frequency is a poor predictor of acceptability – a phenomenon known as the “frequency/acceptability mismatch”. This article argues that the mismatch arises from a “methodological mismatch”, when simple frequency measures are mapped onto complex grammatical units. To illustrate, we discuss the results of acceptability judgments of go/come-v. The construction is subject to a formal constraint (Go see the doctor! vs. *He goes sees the doctor), which results from its mandative semantics (directives, commissives). While a formal model makes no prediction with regard to gradient acceptability of bare (“grammatical”) go/come-v, the usage-based view assumes that acceptability is a function of compatibility with an abstract schema. The experimental ratings are compared with a number of corpus-derived measures: while acceptability is largely independent of (raw) frequency, it is not independent of frequency-related usage distribution. The results add to recent suggestions that the frequency/acceptability mismatch is substantially reduced if the syntactic complexity of a unit is appropriately captured in usage data.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
17.60%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: Cognitive Linguistics presents a forum for linguistic research of all kinds on the interaction between language and cognition. The journal focuses on language as an instrument for organizing, processing and conveying information. Cognitive Linguistics is a peer-reviewed journal of international scope and seeks to publish only works that represent a significant advancement to the theory or methods of cognitive linguistics, or that present an unknown or understudied phenomenon. Topics the structural characteristics of natural language categorization (such as prototypicality, cognitive models, metaphor, and imagery); the functional principles of linguistic organization, as illustrated by iconicity; the conceptual interface between syntax and semantics; the experiential background of language-in-use, including the cultural background; the relationship between language and thought, including matters of universality and language specificity.
期刊最新文献
Using constructions to measure developmental language complexity The role of constructions in understanding predictability measures and their correspondence to word duration A related-event approach to event integration in Japanese complex predicates: iconicity, frequency, or efficiency? Multimodal constructions revisited. Testing the strength of association between spoken and non-spoken features of Tell me about it The role of entrenchment and schematisation in the acquisition of rich verbal morphology
×
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