Differentiating two probability developments in Dutch.


72 views
Uploaded on:
Description
Differentiating two probability developments in Dutch Maria Mos and Promotion Backus ( maria.mos@uvt.nl ; a.m.backus@uvt.nl ) Tilburg College, The Netherlands Contextual investigation: - BAAR and IS TE BAAR: Derivational fasten, pretty much proportionate to –able E.g. leesbaar – read-capable (decipherable)
Transcripts
Slide 1

Differentiating two possibility developments in Dutch Maria Mos and Ad Backus ( maria.mos@uvt.nl ; a.m.backus@uvt.nl ) Tilburg University, The Netherlands

Slide 2

Case study: - BAAR and IS TE BAAR: Derivational attach, pretty much equal to –able E.g. leesbaar – read-capable (intelligible) Dit handschrift is leesbaar This penmanship is clear IS TE: Modal infinitive development, no direct English equal (look at: X is elusive ) E.g. is te verdedig-en - is to protect INF (is defendable) Deze opinie is te verdedig-en This supposition is to guard INF This feeling is defendable

Slide 3

Case study: - BAAR and IS TE Very comparable significance: X can be V-ed Questions: Are they truly equivalent words? It is safe to say that they are gainful?

Slide 4

- BAAR and IS TE: Corpus Gesproken Nederlands (Corpus of Spoken Dutch, CGN) 10 million words Contemporary Dutch 2/3 Netherlands, 1/3 Flanders (Belgium) 14 sorts, going from phone discussions to authority addresses

Slide 5

- BAAR and IS TE: corpus - BAAR: Search for word class = Adj. & structure = *BAAR 261 distinct sorts 3908 tokens The most regular sorts (clearly altered units): Type frequency Translation blijkbaar 1134 obviously openbaar 306 public beschikbaar 173 accessible middelbaar 115 optional zichtbaar 103 unmistakable onvoorstelbaar 81 unfathomable schijnbaar 74 evidently haalbaar 71 attainable bereikbaar 69 inside of scope dankbaar 63 appreciative

Slide 6

- BAAR and IS TE: corpus - BAAR: In rare instantiations (N<5, 50 sorts in the CGN): The importance is ‘non-Agent contention of the Verb can be V-ed’ (detached, potential) This can be the conventional item in transitive verbs ( drinkbaar - drinkable, ondoorprikbaar –unprickable, said of a rankle) Or a (normally) verifiable contention ( adembaar - breathable, roddelbaar - gossipable) The stem is verbal (48/50) The stem is transitive (45/50)

Slide 7

- BAAR and IS TE: corpus IS TE: Search for IS (+optional 0=3 words) + TE + INFINITIVE 120 unique sorts 710 tokens The most continuous verbs: doen ‘do’ 161 zien ‘see’ 105 hopen ‘hope’ 77 zeggen ‘say’ 67 geloven ‘believe’ 23 vergelijken ‘compare’ 18 vinden ‘find’ 15 merken ‘notice’ 12 spreken ‘talk’ 10 lezen ‘read’ 7 This conceals the presence of a few more comprehensive units, particularly with niet : is niet te doen can’t be done is niet te geloven is amazing is niet te vinden is elusive is niet te spreken is not glad is ver te zoeken is elusive

Slide 8

- BAAR and IS TE: corpus IS TE: In rare instantiations the development\'s significance is: A predicative remark (the copula\'s commitment) on the relative trouble or straightforwardness with which an activity should be possible with the undertone that this trouble or simplicity surpasses what could be normal. expressed as the individual conclusion of the speaker In numerous cases, the trouble or straightforwardness is unequivocally shown through a qualifier of degree.

Slide 9

Corpus discoveries: outline For both developments we discover Large number of sorts (proposes efficiency) Large number of tokens Unequal dissemination of tokens over sorts (some incessant, some at times) Entrenchment of both layout and numerous units

Slide 10

Challenge Observation: numerous instantiations are natural (most?) Question: would they say they are ever profitably utilized? Conditional answer: yes, at times. Fundamental perception: we can make up novel instantiations. Question: when do individuals utilize the layouts? On the off chance that they have any?

Slide 11

Productivity versus lexicalisation A profitable development is An example with one or more open spaces that are accessible for new structures The mix of this example with another word(s) is a fundamentally satisfactory and important unit E.g.: The X-er, the Y-er un-ADJ

Slide 12

Productivity versus lexicalisation Tension between rich (=abstract) depiction and mental reality Do speakers have these schema’s in their ‘constructicon’? Then again are most instantiations lexicalized expressions? That’s the inquiry Are normal structures constantly shaped by gainful utilization of the diagram? Answer: No

Slide 13

- BAAR and IS TE: test Magnitude estimation: Comparable to grammaticality judgment undertaking, yet Without a settled scale: members allocate a number to every boost, mirroring its worthiness Advantages over customary grammaticality judgment: No altered number of focuses on the scale No ‘middle’ point which may reflect either normal agreeableness or absence of supposition on a jolt

Slide 14

- BAAR and IS TE: test Are these developments beneficial? On the off chance that: We make boosts (novel structures) beneficially, that contrast concerning verb classification, And Participants recognize reliably in the worthiness between things of diverse classifications Then we realize that they have some type of (conceptual) mental representation) the classes are mentally genuine.

Slide 15

- BAAR and IS TE: test Magnitude estimation: Item variables: CONSTRUCTION TYPE: IS TE (N=24), - BAAR (N=24), fillers (N=36) VERB CATEGORY: Semantic parts and contention structure (5 distinct classifications)

Slide 16

- BAAR and IS TE: test V select. transitive Agent Patient (N=8) drogen - dry E.g.: Een wollen trui is niet droogbaar in de machine (a fleece sweater is not dry-capable in the machine)

Slide 17

- BAAR and IS TE: test V pick. transitive Agent Patient (N=8) drogen - dry E.g.: Een wollen trui is niet droogbaar in de machine (a fleece sweater is not dry-capable in the machine) V transitive Agent Patient (N=12) maaien-cut E.g.: Die wilderness bite the dust de buren hun achtertuin noemen is niet te maaien (that wilderness that the neighbors their patio call is not to cut –it’s difficult to cut that wilderness the neighbors get back to their greenery enclosure)

Slide 18

- BAAR and IS TE: test V pick. transitive Agent Patient (N=8) drogen - dry E.g.: Een wollen trui is niet droogbaar in de machine (a fleece sweater is not dry-capable in the machine) V transitive Agent Patient (N=12) maaien-cut E.g.: Die wilderness bite the dust de buren hun achtertuin noemen is niet te maaien (that wilderness that the neighbors their patio call is not to cut –it’s difficult to cut that wilderness the neighbors get back to their greenery enclosure) V intransitive, inferred obj./quiet (N=8) zingen - sing E.g.: De tekst van dit liedje is zo lastig dat het bijna niet zingbaar is (the content of this tune is difficult to the point that it not sing-capable is)

Slide 19

- BAAR and IS TE: test V transitive Stimulus Experiencer (N=16) two subgroups: detached ungrammatical (N=8) lukken - succeed E.g. Het is een ambitieus arrangement, maar als iedereen helpt is het zeker lukbaar (it is a yearning arrangement, yet in the event that everybody assists it with ising beyond any doubt succeed-capable) Het is me gelukt versus *Ik word gelukt. (Es ist mir gelungen versus *Ich werde gelungen)

Slide 20

- BAAR and IS TE: test V transitive Stimulus Experiencer (N=16) two subgroups: latent ungrammatical (N=8) lukken - succeed E.g. Het is een ambitieus arrangement, maar als iedereen helpt is het zeker lukbaar (it is a yearning arrangement, however in the event that everybody assists it with ising beyond any doubt succeed-capable) Het is me gelukt versus *Ik word gelukt. (Es ist mir gelungen versus *Ich werde gelungen) inactive barely worthy (N=8) afschrikken - hinder E.g. Ongewenst bezoek is af te schrikken met een alarmsignaal (undesirable visit is set for panic with an alert sign - undesirable guests can be discouraged with a caution signal) De menigte schrikte me af versus ?Ik werd afgeschrikt entryway de menigte (The group frightened me away versus I was frightened away by the group.)

Slide 21

- BAAR and IS TE: test Setup of the examination: Procedure: online trial, presentation + test stage. Term principle test: 15-20 minutes Participants: 69 grown-ups 138 kids, level 6 (11-12 yrs)

Slide 22

- BAAR and IS TE: test Main results: grown-ups Reliable test (Cronbach’s α = .85) Difference between development sorts: IS TE > BAAR (Anova, df = 2, p.39), fillers not the same as either sort Difference between verb classifications: Experiencer verbs < all Agent-Patient verbs (Anova, df = 4, p.000. Post-hoc Bonferroni: V Exp < others, p<.007) 1. V select. transitive Agent Patient (mean Z =.391) 2. V transitive Agent Patient (mean Z =.229) 3. V intransitive, inferred obj./patient (mean Z = .201) 4. V transitive Experiencer subject –pass (mean Z =-.705) 5. V transitive Experiencer subject +pass (mean Z =-.533)

Slide 23

- BAAR and IS TE: test IS TE and BAAR over distinctive verb sorts: grown-ups

Slide 24

- BAAR and IS TE: test Main results: youngsters Reliable test (Cronbach’s α = .93) No noteworthy contrast between development sorts (Anova, df = 2, p.39), Difference between verb classes: Experiencer verbs < all Agent-Patient verbs Mean Z-scores: V select. transitive Agent Patient : . 296 V transitive Agent Patient : . 087 V intransitive, suggested obj./understanding . 091 V transitive Experiencer –pass: - .374 V transitive Experiencer +pass: - 236

Slide 25

- BAAR and IS TE: test IS TE and BAAR over distinctive verb sorts: youngsters

Slide 26

- BAAR and IS TE: examination IS TE and BAAR over diverse verb sorts: grown-ups Acceptable aloof = higher agreeableness of IS TE (contrasted with BAAR)

Slide 27

Experiment: rundown Stimulus Experiencer verbs ar

Recommended
View more...