Angewandte Linguistik
Refine
Year of publication
- 2011 (2) (remove)
Document Type
- Part of a Book (2) (remove)
Language
- English (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2)
Keywords
- Grammatik (2)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (2)
- Gesprochene Sprache (1)
- Relativsatz (1)
- Tschechisch (1)
Publicationstate
Reviewstate
Publisher
- Narr (2)
This study explores the interdependence of qualitative and quantitative analysis in articulating empirically plausible and theoretically coherent generalizations about grammatical structure. I will show that the use of large electronic corpora is indispensable to the grammarian's work, serving as a rich source of semantic and contextual information, which turns out to be crucial in categorizing and explaining grammatical forms. These general concerns are illustrated by the patterns of use of Czech relative clauses (RC) with the non-declinable relativizer co, by taking a set of existing claims about these RCs and testing their accuracy on corpus material. The relevant analytic categories revolve around the referential type of the relativized noun, the interaction between relativization and deixis, and the semantic relationship between the relativized noun and the proposition expressed by the RC. The analysis demonstrates that some of the existing claims are fully invalid in the face of regularly attested semantic distinctions, while others are more or less on the right track but often not comprehensive or precise enough to capture the full richness of the facts. 1
Conversation is usually considered to be grammatically simple, while academic writing is often claimed to be structurally complex, associated primarily with a greater use of dependent clauses. Our goal in the present paper is to challenge these stereotypes, based on the results of large-scale corpus investigations. We argue that both conversation and professional academic writing are grammatically complex but that their complexities are dramatically different. Surprisingly, the traditional view that complexity is realized through extensive clausal embedding leads to the conclusion that conversation is more complex than academic writing. In contrast, written academic discourse is actually much more ‘compressed’ than elaborated, and the complexities of academic writing are realized mostly as phrasal embedding rather than embedded clauses.