Discourse-Pragmatic and Processing-Related Motivators of the ordering of Reason Clauses in an Academic Corpus

• Authors: Abbas A. Rezaee , Majid Nemati , Seyyed Ehsan Golparvar
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The present research is aimed at examining the relative importance of the competing motivators of the sequencing of reason clauses in a corpus of research articles of applied linguistics. All the finite reason clauses accompanied by their main clauses in this corpus were collected. Random forest of conditional inference trees is the statistical modelling in this study. The findings showed that sentence-final reason clauses outnumber sentenceinitial ones. Moreover, subordinator choice and bridging, which are discourse-pragmatic constraints on clause positioning, emerged as the two more powerful predictors of the ordering of reason clauses in this corpus. Furthermore, the complexity of the clause turned out to be a stronger processing related predictor than the length of the clause.

Keywords

EN

positioning; reason clauses; subordinator; bridging; complexity

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Łódzki. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego
• Journal: Research in Language
• Year: 2018
• Volume: 16
• Issue: 3
• Pages: 325-339

Dates

published

2018-09-30

Contributors

author

Abbas A. Rezaee

• University of Tehran, Iran

author

Majid Nemati

• University of Tehran, Iran

author

Seyyed Ehsan Golparvar

• University of Tehran, Iran

References

• Aarts, Bass. 1988. Clauses of Concession in Written Present-day British English. Journal of English Linguistics 2. 39–85.
• Arnold, Jennifer E., Losongco, Anthony, Thomas Wasow and Ryan Ginstrom. 2000. Heaviness vs. Newness: The Effects of Structural Complexity and Discourse Status on Constituent Ordering. Language 76(1). 28–55.
• Bever, Thomas G. 1970. The Cognitive Basis for Linguistic Structures. In: John R. Hayes (ed), Cognition and the Development of Language, 279–362. Hoboken: Wiley.
• Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Gwoffrey, Susan Conrad and Edward Finegan. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.
• Birner, Betty J. and Gregory Ward. 1998. Information Status and Noncanonical Word Order in English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.
• Breiman, Leo. 2001. Random Forests. Machine Learning 45 (1). 5–32.
• Chafe, Wallace. 1984. How People Use Adverbial Clauses. Berkeley Linguistics Society 10. 437–49.
• Dahl, Östen. 2004. The Growth and Maintenance of Linguistic Complexity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.
• Diessel, Holger. 2001. The Ordering Distribution of Main and adverbial Clauses: A typological Stud. Language 77 (3). 433–455.
• Diessel, Holger. 2005. Competing Motivations for the Ordering of Main and Adverbial Clauses. Linguistics 43 (3). 449–470.
• Diessel, Holger. 2008. Iconicity of Sequence: A Corpus-based Analysis of the Positioning of Temporal Adverbial Clauses in English. Cognitive Linguistics 19 (3). 465–490.
• Ford, Cecilia E. 1993. Grammar in Interaction: Adverbial Clauses in American English Conversations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Gibson, Edward. 1998. Linguistic Complexity: Locality of syntactic Dependencies. Cognition 68 (1). 1–76.
• Gibson, Edward. 2000. The Dependency Locality Theory: A Distance-based Theory of Linguistic Complexity. In: Alec Marantz, Yasushi Miyashita and Wayne O’Neil (eds.), Image, Language, Brain, 95–126. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Givón, Talmy. 2001. Syntax: An Introduction. vol. 1. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
• Givón, Talmy. 2011. Ute Reference Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.
• Greenbaum, Sidney and Gerald Nelson. 1996. Positions of Adverbial Clauses in British English. World Englishes 15 (1). 69–81.
• Hawkins, John. A. 1994. A Performance Theory of Order and Constituency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Hawkins, John A. 2004. Efficiency and Complexity in Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Hothorn, Torsten, Hornik, Kurt and Achim Zeileis. 2006. Unbiased Recursive Partitioning: A Conditional Inference Framework. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics 15 (3). 651–674.
• Iwasaki, Noriko. 2010. Style Shifts Among Japanese Learners Before and After Study Abroad in Japan: Becoming Active Social Agents in Japanese. Applied Linguistics 31 (1). 45–71.
• Kirk, John M. 1997. Subordinate Clauses in English. Journal of English Linguistics 25 (4). 349–364.
• Li, Ming and Vitányi, Paul. 1997. An Introduction to Kolmogorov Complexity and Its Applications. Heidelberg: Springer.
• Miestamo, Matti. 2006. On the feasibility of complexity metrics. In FinEst linguistics, proceedings of the annual Finnish and Estonian conference of linguistics, Tallinn, 11-26.
• Mukherjee, Joybrato. 2001. Principles of pattern selection. Journal of English linguistics 29 (4). 295-314.
• Quirk, Randolph. et al. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.
• Rezaee, Abbas Ali and Seyyed Ehsan Golparvar. 2016. The Sequencing of Adverbial Clauses of Time in Academic English: Random Forest Modelling. Journal of Language Modelling 4(2), 225-244.
• Rezaee, Abbas Ali and Seyyed Ehsan Golparvar. 2017. Conditional Inference Tree Modelling of Competing Motivators of the Positioning of Concessive Clauses: The Case of a Non-native Corpus. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics 24(2-3), 89-106.
• Saif, Shahrzad. 2006. Aiming for Positive Washback: A Case Study of International Teaching Assistants. Language Testing 23 (1). 1-34.
• Schoonen, Rob. et al. 2011. Modelling the Development of L1 and EFL Writing Proficiency of Secondary School Students. Language learning 61(1). 31-79.
• Shizuka, Tetsuhito, Takeuchi, Osamu, Tomoko Yashima and Kiyomi Yoshizawa. 2006. A Comparison of Three-and Four-Option English Tests for university Entrance Selection Purposes in Japan. Language Testing 23 (1). 35-57.
• Tagliamonte, Sali A. and Harald R. Baayen. 2012. Models, Forests, and Trees of York English: Was/were Variation as a Case Study for Statistical Practice. Language Variation and Change 24 (2). 135–178.
• Thompson, Sandra A., Rober A. Longacre, and Shin Ja J. Hwang. 2007. Adverbial Clauses. In: Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language Typology and Syntactic Description, 237–300. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Thompson, Sandra A. 1985. Grammar and Written Discourse. Initial and Final Purpose Clauses in English. In: Talmy Givón (ed.), Quantified Studies in Discourse. Special Issue of Text, 5, 55–84.
• Trude, Alison M. and Natasha Tokowicz. 2011. Negative Transfer from Spanish and English to Portuguese Pronunciation: The Roles of Inhibition and Working Memory. Language Learning 61(1). 259-280.
• Vandepitte, Sonia. 1993. A Pragmatic Study of the Expression and the Interpretation of Causality: Aonjuncts and Conjunctions in Modern Spoken British English. Brussel: Paleis der Academiën.
• Vafaee, Payman, Basheer, Nesrine and Reese Heitner. 2012. Application of Confirmatory Factor Analysis in Construct Validity Investigation: The Case of the Grammar Sub-Test of the CEP Placement Exam. Iranian Journal of Language Testing 2 (1). 1-19.
• Verstraete, Jean-Christophe. 2004. Initial and Final Position for Adverbial Clauses in English: The Constructional Basis of the Discursive and Syntactic Differences. Linguistics 42 (4). 819–853.
• Vulanovic, Relja. 2007. On Measuring Language Complexity as Relative to the Conveyed Linguistic Information. SKY Journal of Linguistics 20. 399–427.
• Wasow, Thompson. 2002. Postverbal Behavior. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
• Wiechmann, Daniel and Kerz, Elma. 2013. The Positioning of Concessive Adverbial Clauses in English. English Language and Linguistics 17. 1–22.

Identifiers

DOI

10.2478/rela-2018-0014