反身分析使役:及物性参数的历时分析

Ulrike Schneider
{"title":"反身分析使役:及物性参数的历时分析","authors":"Ulrike Schneider","doi":"10.1017/s136067432300028x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The present study is an exploration of the field of analytic causatives. It focuses on reflexive constructions with bring, cause, make and force. The analysis builds on Mondorf & Schneider's (2016) finding that causative bring has specialized to modal-negated-reflexive uses. It explores whether this emerging constraint reduces overlap with other causatives. A second focal point is on the nature of the constructions’ constraints. The article applies Hopper & Thompson's (1980) concept of transitivity as a cline. Employing the same 76-million-word corpus as Mondorf & Schneider (2016), which consists of fiction from the fifteenth to the twentieth century, the article shows that reflexive uses of analytic causatives have almost quadrupled over the past 500 years. Results confirm that bring is the only reflexive causative strongly associated with modal and negated contexts. Furthermore, some of the constructions display characteristic transitivity profiles.","PeriodicalId":36216,"journal":{"name":"Korean Journal of English Language and Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reflexive analytic causatives: a diachronic analysis of transitivity parameters\",\"authors\":\"Ulrike Schneider\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s136067432300028x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The present study is an exploration of the field of analytic causatives. It focuses on reflexive constructions with bring, cause, make and force. The analysis builds on Mondorf & Schneider's (2016) finding that causative bring has specialized to modal-negated-reflexive uses. It explores whether this emerging constraint reduces overlap with other causatives. A second focal point is on the nature of the constructions’ constraints. The article applies Hopper & Thompson's (1980) concept of transitivity as a cline. Employing the same 76-million-word corpus as Mondorf & Schneider (2016), which consists of fiction from the fifteenth to the twentieth century, the article shows that reflexive uses of analytic causatives have almost quadrupled over the past 500 years. Results confirm that bring is the only reflexive causative strongly associated with modal and negated contexts. Furthermore, some of the constructions display characteristic transitivity profiles.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36216,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Korean Journal of English Language and Linguistics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Korean Journal of English Language and Linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s136067432300028x\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Journal of English Language and Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s136067432300028x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究是对分析使役句领域的探索。它侧重于bring, cause, make和force的反身结构。该分析基于Mondorf & Schneider(2016)的发现,即导致性带来专门用于否定情态反射的用途。它探讨了这种新出现的约束是否减少了与其他使役的重叠。第二个重点是结构约束的性质。本文采用霍珀和汤普森(1980)的及物性概念作为渐变。这篇文章使用了与Mondorf & Schneider(2016)相同的7600万字的语料库,其中包括15世纪到20世纪的小说。文章表明,在过去的500年里,分析使词的自反用法几乎翻了两番。结果证实,bring是唯一与情态和否定语境强烈相关的反身使役。此外,一些结构还表现出特有的及物性特征。
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
Reflexive analytic causatives: a diachronic analysis of transitivity parameters
The present study is an exploration of the field of analytic causatives. It focuses on reflexive constructions with bring, cause, make and force. The analysis builds on Mondorf & Schneider's (2016) finding that causative bring has specialized to modal-negated-reflexive uses. It explores whether this emerging constraint reduces overlap with other causatives. A second focal point is on the nature of the constructions’ constraints. The article applies Hopper & Thompson's (1980) concept of transitivity as a cline. Employing the same 76-million-word corpus as Mondorf & Schneider (2016), which consists of fiction from the fifteenth to the twentieth century, the article shows that reflexive uses of analytic causatives have almost quadrupled over the past 500 years. Results confirm that bring is the only reflexive causative strongly associated with modal and negated contexts. Furthermore, some of the constructions display characteristic transitivity profiles.
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
Korean Journal of English Language and Linguistics
Korean Journal of English Language and Linguistics Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
John Considine, Sixteenth-century English dictionaries. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2022. Pp. xiv + 496. ISBN 9780198832287. Elisa Mattiello, Transitional morphology: Combining forms in modern English (Studies in English Language). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2023. Pp. v + 238. ISBN 9781009168281. Epistemic phrases and adolescent speech in West London ‘Well, taakin about he da bring inta me yead wat I promised var ta tell ee about’: representations of south-western speech in nineteenth-century dialect writing Speech reflections in Late Modern English pauper letters from Dorset
×
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