Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T15:25:08.707Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Preferred argument structure in spoken French and Spanish

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

William J. Ashby  and
Paola Bentivoglio
William J. Ashby
Affiliation:
University of California, Santa Barbara
Paola Bentivoglio
Affiliation:
Universidad Central de Venezuela
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article uses the quantitative methodology of goldvarb to examine the variable distribution of lexical noun phrases representing core arguments of the verb in a corpus of spoken French and a corpus of spoken Spanish. It is shown that this distribution is not random, but instead conforms to a grammatically and pragmatically motivated pattern known as Preferred Argument Structure.

Type
Research Article
Information
Language Variation and Change , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , March 1993 , pp. 61 - 76
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ashby, William J. (1988). The syntax, pragmatics, and sociolinguistics of left-and right-dislocations in French. Lingua 75:29–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bentivoglio, Paola. (1988). La posición del sujeto en el español de Caracas: Un análisis de los factores lingüísticos y extralingüísticos. In Hammond, Robert M. & Resnick, Melvyn C. (eds.), Studies in Caribbean Spanish dialectology. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. 13–23.Google Scholar
Bentivoglio, Paola. (1989). La posición del sujeto en las cláusulas copulativas en el español de Caracas. Actas del VII Congreso Internacional, Asociación de Lingüistica y Filología da America Latina [ALFAL], tomo II. Santo Domingo, RD: ALFAL, Filial Dominicana. 173–196.Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace. (1987). Cognitive constraints on information flow. In Tomlin, Russell (ed.), Coherence and grouding in discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 21–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danlos, Laurence. (1992). Support verb constructions: Linguistic properties, representation, translation. Journal of French Language Studies 2:1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, Robert M. W. (1979). Ergativity. Language 55:59–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downing, Pamela. (1985). Classifier constructions and referentiality marking in Japanese. Paper presented at Conference on Japanese Language and Linguistics,University of California,Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Du Bois, John W. (1985). Competing motivations. In Haiman, John (ed.), Iconicity and syntax. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 343–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Du Bois, John W. (1987). The discourse basis of ergativity. Language 63:805–855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Du Bois, John W., & Thompson, Sandra A. (1991). Dimensions of a theory of information flow. Unpublished manuscript, University of California. Santa Barbara.Google Scholar
Dutra, Rosalia. (1987). The hybrid S category in Brazilian Portuguese: Some implications for word order. Studies in Language 11:163–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giry-Schneider, Jacqueline. (1987). Les prédicats nominaux en français: Les phrases simples à verbe support. Geneva and Paris: Droz.Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul, & Thompson, Sandra A. (1980). Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language 56:251–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iwasaki, Shoichi. (1985). The “given A constraint” and the Japanese particle ga. In Delancy, S. (ed.), Proceedings of the first Annual Pacific Linguistics Conference. Eugene: Department of Linguistics, University of Oregon. 152–167.Google Scholar
Kumpf, Lorraine. (1992). Preferred argument structure in second language discourse: A preliminary study. Studies in Language 16:369–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, William. (1972). Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud. (1987). On the status of SVO sentences in French discourse. In Tomlin, Russell (ed.), Coherence and grounding in discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 217–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud. (1988). Presentational cleft constructions in spoken French. In Haiman, John & Thompson, Sandra A. (eds.), Clause combining in grammar and discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 135–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, Hyo Sang. (1984). The distribution of preferred argument structure. Unpublished manuscript, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
O'Dowd, Elizabeth. (1990). Discourse pressure, genre and grammatical alignment — After Du Bois. Studies in Language 14:365–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, Doris. (1987). Information structuring in Papago narrative discourse. Language 63:783–804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prince, Ellen. (1981). Towards a taxonomy of given-new information. In Cole, Peter (ed.), Radical pragmatics. New York: Academic. 223–256.Google Scholar
Rand, David, & Sankoff, David. (1990). Goldvarb 2.0. Program and documentation obtained from authors.Google Scholar
Scancarelli, Janine. (1985). Referential strategies in Chamorro narratives. Studies in Language 9:335–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Wendy. (1987). Preferred argument structure in Hebrew discourse. Unpublished manuscript, University of California, Los Angles.Google Scholar
Tao, Hongyin. (1991). Functional units and organizing principles of Mandarin oral discourse. Unpublished manuscript, University of California, Santa Barbara.Google Scholar