Search

This special collection brings together research exploring and evaluating probabilistic variation patterns from a comparative perspective, thus highlighting current work situated at the crossroads of research on usage-based theoretical linguistics, variationist linguistics, and sociolinguistics. The contributions in the collection advance our understanding of the plasticity of syntactic knowledge on the part of language users with diverse regional and/or cultural backgrounds, and demonstrate how a probabilistic approach to grammatical variation can offer insight into the scope and limits of language variation. In this general introduction to the special collection, we provide some essential background for perspective, and subsequently summarize the contributions in the collection.

This paper introduces a new resource designed to facilitate the quantitative investigation of syntactic variation in spoken language from a comparative perspective. The datasets comprise homogeneously annotated collections of “interchangeable” (i.e. competing) genitive and dative variants in four varieties of English: American English, British English, Canadian English, and New Zealand English. To showcase the empirical potential of the data source, we present a suggestive analysis that investigates the extent to which the probabilistic grammar of genitive and dative variant choice differs across varieties. The statistical analysis reveals that while there are a number of subtle probabilistic contrasts between the regional varieties under study, there is overall a striking degree of cross-varietal homogeneity. We conclude by outlining directions for future research. This article is part of the Special Collection: Probabilistic grammars: Syntactic variation in a comparative perspective

This paper builds on the observation that the animacy effects we find in English genitive variation are part of a larger cross-linguistic pattern as reflected in possession splits based on animacy (Koptjevskaja-Tamm 2001, 2002; Stolz et al. 2008), which are an expression of harmonic alignment in the domain of possession (Aissen & Bresnan 2002; Rosenbach 2008). Focussing on English and Afrikaans, a contrastive corpus analysis of genitive variation reveals similar forms of animacy splits in these two languages, though they differ in the strength of the animacy constraint, with the Afrikaans prenominal possessive (the se-genitive) occurring more freely with inanimate possessors than the English s-genitive. In a follow-up experimental study it is then shown that the weaker animacy constraint in Afrikaans carries over to the L2 English of Afrikaans speakers in South Africa. This study emphasizes the importance of a cross-linguistic perspective when looking at genitive variation in English and its varieties (1) to recognize that Englishes form part of a typological continuum of possession splits, and (2) to enable us to identify the possible transfer of constraint strengths from one language to another one in a situation where these languages are in contact, as in the case of English and Afrikaans in South Africa.This article is part of the Special Collection: Probabilistic grammars: Syntactic variation in a comparative perspective

In this paper, I propose that Probabilistic Grammar may benefit from incorporating theoretical insights from Cognitive (Socio)Linguistics. I begin by introducing Cognitive Linguistics. Then, I propose a model of the domain-general cognitive constraints (markedness of coding, statistical preemption, and structural priming) that condition language (variation). Subsequently, three case studies are presented that test the predictions of this model on three distinct alternations in English and Spanish (variable agreement with existential haber, variable agreement with existential there be, and Spanish subject pronoun expression). For each case study, the model generates empirically correct predictions. I conclude that, with the support of Cognitive Sociolinguistics, Probabilistic Grammar may move beyond description towards explanation. This article is part of the special collection: Probabilistic grammars: Syntactic variation in a comparative perspective