Advertisement

Alla finfine sono daccordo’: A Corpus-Based Case Study on Italian Adverbial Phrases Grammaticalization

  • Lucia BussoEmail author
  • Margherita Castelli
Conference paper
  • 282 Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11755)

Abstract

We present results of a corpus-based synchronic study on the grammaticalization of Italian adverbial phrases. In particular, we claim that spelling irregularities of adverbial constructions provide evidence of ongoing grammaticalization processes. Adverbial phrases are hence already decategorized analytic constructions that are undergoing paradigmaticization and subsequently lexicalization. We selected 40 adverbial phrases of different length (2–5 constituents) at different stages of the process: from completely non-alternating structures to phrases with two (or more) accepted standard spellings. By means of a corpus-based analysis we considered several properties of those constructions (i.e. frequency) and tested their significance with mixed effect modelling analysis. Specifically, we model the presence of spelling irregularities, its measure (i.e. partial or total univerbation), and frequency of irregular forms. Results of such a corpus-based statistical analysis, albeit preliminary, yield several interesting considerations on synchronic factors that facilitate or hinder processes of grammaticalization, especially the role of frequency and number of construction constituents. Findings support current usage-based literature on grammaticalization as constructionalization.

Keywords

Grammaticalization Italian Adverbs Usage-based linguistics 

References

  1. 1.
    Kuryłowicz, J.: The evolution of grammatical categories. Diogenes 13(51), 55–71 (1965)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Meillet, A.: L’évolution des formes grammaticales. Scientia XII(XXXVI), 6 (1912)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hopper, P.J., Traugott, E.C.: Grammaticalization. CUP, Cambridge (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Norde, M.: Degrammaticalization. OUP, Oxford (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Protopopescu, D.: The Morphologization Of Adverbs – An Instance of Grammaticalization. Studii și cercetări lingvistice (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bybee, J.L.: Usage‐based theory and grammaticalization. In: Heiko, N., Heine, B. (eds). The Oxford Handbook of Grammaticalization. OUP, Oxford (2011)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Heine, B.: Auxiliaries: Cognitive Forces and Grammaticalization. OUP USA, New York (1993)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bybee, J.L., Torres, R.: Phonological and grammatical variation in exemplar models. Stud. Hisp. Lusophone Linguist. 1(2), 399–414 (2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Torres Cacoullos, R., Walker, J.A.: Collocations in Grammaticalization and Variation. OUP, Oxford (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bybee, J.L.: From usage to Grammar: the mind’ s response to repetition. Language 82(4), 711–733 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ellis, N.C.: Second language acquisition. In: Gass, S., Mackey, A. (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (2013)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Browman, C.P., Goldstein, L.: Articulatory phonology: an overview. Phonetica 49(3–4), 155–180 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mowrey, R., Pagliuca, W.: The reductive character of articulatory evolution. Ital. J. Linguist. 7, 37–124 (1995)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lehmann, C.: Thoughts on Grammaticalization, 3rd edn. Language Science Press (2015)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Norde, M.: Lehmann’s parameters revisited. In: Grammaticalization and Language Change: New Reflections, pp. 73–109 (2012)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Givon, T.: On Understanding Grammar. John Benjamins, Amsterdam (1979)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lindquist, H., Mair, C. (eds.): Corpus Approaches to Grammaticalization in English. Benjamins, Amsterdam (2004)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hildebrand-Edgar, N.: Disentangling frequency effects and grammaticalization, p. 23 (2016)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Renzi, L.: Come cambia la lingua. L’italiano in movimento. Mulino, Bologna (2012)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Barlow, M., Kemmer, S.: Usage Based Models of Language. CSLI, Chicago (2000)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Beckner, C., Bybee, J.: A usage-based account of constituency and reanalysis. Lang. Learn. 59, 27–46 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bybee, J.: Language. Usage and Cognition. CUP, Cambridge (2010)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hopper, P.J.: Emergent grammar. In: PrOCEedings of the Thirteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Berkley, CA, pp. 139–157 (1987)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bybee, J.L.: Frequency of Use and the Organization of Language. OUP, Oxford (2006)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bybee, J.L.: Usage-based theory and exemplar representation. In: Hoffman, T., Trousdale, G. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar, pp. 49–69. OUP, Oxford (2013)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bybee, J.L., Hopper, P.J. (eds.): Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure. Benjamins, Amsterdam (2001)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Shank, C.: Grammaticalization, complementization and the development of an epistemic parenthetical: a diachronic analysis of the verb feel. Int. J. Lang. Linguist. 3(3), 19–33 (2016)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Thompson, S.A., Mulac, A.: A quantitative perspective on the grammaticization of epistemic parentheticals in English. In: Traugott, E.C., Heine, B. (eds.) Typological Studies in Language, pp. 313–339. John Benjamins, Amsterdam (1991)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lorenz, D.: From reduction to emancipation: Is gonna a word? In: Hasselgård, H., et al. (eds.) Studies in Corpus Linguistics, pp. 133–152. John Benjamins, Amsterdam (2013)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hoffmann, S.: Grammaticalization and English Complex Prepositions: A Corpus-based Study. Routledge, London/New York (2007)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Goldberg, A.E.: Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. OUP (2006)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hilpert, M.: Construction Grammar and its Application to English. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh (2014)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Coussé, E., et al.: Grammaticalization meets Construction Grammar. John Benjamins Publishing Company (2018)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hilpert, M.: From hand-carved to computer-based: noun-participle compounding and the upward strengthening hypothesis. Cogn. Linguist. 26(1), 113–147 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Traugott, E.C., Trousdale, G.: Constructionalization and Constructional Changes. OUP, Oxford, New York (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Michael, I.: English Grammatical Categories. CUP, Cambridge (1970)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hopper, P.: The paradigm at the end of the universe. In: Ramat, A., Hopper, P. (eds.) Limits of Grammaticalization, pp. 147–158. John Benjamins, Amsterdam (1998)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Payne, T.: Describing Morphosyntax: A Guide for Field Linguists. CUP, Cambridge (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    van der Auwera, J.: Adverbial Constructions in the Languages of Europe, 2nd edn. de Gruyter, Berlin (2011)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Hummel, M., Valera, S. (eds.): Adjective Adverb Interfaces in Romance. John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam (2017)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Ramat, P., Ricca, D.: Prototypical adverbs: On the scalarity/radiality of the notion of adverb. Rivista di Linguistica 6, 289–326 (1994)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Rauh, G.: Adverbs as a linguistic category (?). In: Pittner, K., Elsner, D., Barteld, F. (eds.) Adverbs. Functional and Diachronic Aspects, pp. 19–45. John Benjamins, Amsterdam (2015)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Ramat, P., Ricca, D.: Sentence adverbs in the languages of Europe. In: Auwera, J. (ed) Adverbial Constructions in the Languages of Europe, pp. 187–275. de Gruyter, Berlin (1998)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Baroni, M., et al.: The WaCky wide web: a collection of very large linguistically processed web-crawled corpora. Lang. Resour. Eval. 43(3), 209–226 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    R Development Core Team: R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org
  46. 46.
    Barth, D., Kapatsinski, V.: Evaluating logistic mixed-effects models of corpus-linguistic data in light of lexical diffusion. In: Speelman, D., Heylen, K., Geeraerts, D. (eds.) Mixed-Effects Regression Models in Linguistics. QMHSS, pp. 99–116. Springer, Cham (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69830-4_6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Gries, S.: The most under-used statistical method in corpus linguistics: multi-level (and mixed-effects) models. Corpora 10(1), 95–125 (2015)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Baayen, R.H., Davidson, D.J., Bates, D.M.: Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. J. Mem. Lang. 59(4), 390–412 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Singmann, H., et al.: afex: Analysis of Factorial Experiments. R Package Version (2017)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Università di PisaPisaItaly
  2. 2.Università degli Studi di PerugiaPerugiaItaly

Personalised recommendations