What are the scope and limits of syntactic variation within and across varieties of English? To address this question, we investigate well-known syntactic variation between the s-genitive (Mr Barnsley’s management) and the of-genitive (the management of Mr Barnsley) in nine varieties of English. We specifically gauge the stability of constraints on this variation by analyzing a richly annotated dataset spanning 10,558 interchangeable genitives from nine components of the International Corpus of English. Regression modeling indicates that constraints such as possessor animacy, constituent length, final sibilancy of the possessor, as well as the effect of medium (spoken vs. written) as a language-external factor differ in strength across varieties. The language-internal constraints, however, never change effect direction. We conclude that the probabilistic grammar fueling genitive variation is surprisingly stable overall, but does exhibit some fluidity along the lines of a distinction between English as a native language (ENL) and English as a second language (ESL) varieties: those constraints that tend to favor s-genitive usage tend to be weakened in ESL varieties.
DaviesMarkFuchsRobert. 2015. Expanding horizons in the study of World Englishes with the 1.9 billion word Global Web-based English Corpus (GloWbE). English World-Wide36(1). 1-28.
2.
GreenbaumSidney. 1991. ICE: the International Corpus of English. English Today7(4). 3-7.
3.
The ICE Project. 2009. The Design of ICE Corpora @ ICE-corpora.net. International Corpus of English. http://ice-corpora.net/ice/design.htm (20June2016).
4.
BaayenR. Harald. 2008. Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5.
BatesDouglasMaechlerMartinBolkerBenWalkerSteven. 2014. lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. Version 1.1-12. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4 (February2016).
6.
BehaghelOtto. 1909. Beziehungen zwischen Umfang und Reihenfolge von Satzgliedern. Indogermanische Forschungen25(1). 110-142.
7.
BentzChristianWinterBodo. 2013. Languages with more second language learners tend to lose nominal case. Language Dynamics and Change3(1). 1-27.
8.
BiberDouglasJohanssonStigLeechGeoffreyConradSusanFineganEdward. 1999. Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow: Longman.
9.
BresnanJoanFordMarilyn. 2010. Predicting syntax: Processing dative constructions in American and Australian varieties of English. Language86(1). 168-213.
10.
BresnanJoanHayJennifer. 2008. Gradient grammar: An effect of animacy on the syntax of give in New Zealand and American English. Lingua118(2). 245-259.
11.
BybeeJoan. 2006. From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition. Language82(4). 711-733.
12.
BybeeJoanHoppePaulr. 2001. Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
13.
CrystalDavid. 2004. The Cambridge encyclopedia of the English language. 2nd edn.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14.
DenisonDavidScottAlan K.BörjarsKersti. 2010. The real distribution of the English “group genitive.”Studies in Language34(3). 532-564.
15.
EdwardsAlison. 2014. English in the Netherlands. Functions, forms and attitudes. Cambridge: University of Cambridge dissertation.
16.
EhretKatharinaWolkChristophSzmrecsanyiBenedikt. 2014. Quirky quadratures: On rhythm and weight as constraints on genitive variation in an unconventional data set. English Language and Linguistics18(2). 263-303.
17.
FellbaumChristiane. 1998. WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
18.
FoxJohn. 2003. Effect displays in R for generalised linear models. Journal of Statistical Software8(15). 1-18.
19.
GahlSusanneGarnseySusan. 2004. Knowledge of grammar, knowledge of usage: Syntactic probabilities affect pronunciation variation. Language80(4). 748-775.
20.
GelmanAndrewHillJennifer. 2007. Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21.
GrafmillerJason. 2014. Variation in English genitives across modality and genres. English Language and Linguistics18(3). 471-496.
22.
GriesStefan Th. 2002. Evidence in linguistics: Three approaches to genitives in English. In BrendRuth M.SullivanWilliam J.LommelArle R. (eds.), LACUS Forum XXVIII: What constitutes evidence in linguistics, 17-31. Fullerton: LACUS.
23.
GriesStefan Th. 2015. The most under-used method in corpus linguistics: Multi-level (and mixed-effects) models. Corpora10(1). 95-125.
24.
GriesStefan Th.DeshorsSandra C.2015. EFL and/vs. ESL? A multi-level regression modeling perspective on bridging the paradigm gap. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research1(1). 130-159.
25.
HickeyRaymond. 2010. The Englishes of Ireland: Emergence and transportation. In KirkpatrickAndy (ed.), The Routledge handbook of World Englishes, 76-95. London: Routledge.
26.
HilpertMartin. 2008. The English comparative—Language structure and language use. English Language and Linguistics12(3). 395-417.
27.
HinrichsLars. 2006. Codeswitching on the web. English and Jamaican Creole in e-mail communication. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
28.
HinrichsLarsSzmrecsanyiBenedikt. 2007. Recent changes in the function and frequency of Standard English genitive constructions: A multivariate analysis of tagged corpora. English Language and Linguistics11(3). 437-474.
29.
HundtMarianneSzmrecsanyiBenedikt. 2012. Animacy in early New Zealand English. English World-Wide33(3). 241-263.
JankowskiBridget Lynn. 2013. A variationist approach to cross-register language variation and change. Toronto: University of Toronto dissertation. https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/handle/1807/43604 (20November2015).
32.
JankowskiBridget L.TagliamonteSali A.2014. On the genitive’s trail: Data and method from a sociolinguistic perspective. English Language and Linguistics18(2). 305-329.
33.
KachruBraj B.1985. Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realism: The English language in the Outer Circle. In QuirkRandolphWiddowsonHenry G. (eds.), English in the world: Teaching and learning the language and literatures, 11-30. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
34.
KleinWolfgangPerdueClive. 1997. The basic variety (or: Couldn’t natural languages be much simpler?). Second Language Research13(1). 301-347.
35.
KortmannBerndLunkenheimerKerstin (eds.). 2012. The Mouton world atlas of variation in English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
36.
KortmannBerndSzmrecsanyiBenedikt. 2004. Global synopsis: Morphological and syntactic variation in English. In KortmannBerndSchneiderEdgarBurridgeKateMesthrieRajendUptonClive (eds.), A handbook of varieties of English, vol. 2, 1142-1202. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
LabovWilliam. 1972. Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
39.
MacDonaldMaryellen C.2013. How language production shapes language form and comprehension. Frontiers in Psychology4(1). 1-16.
40.
MacWhinneyBrian. 1997. Second language acquisition and the competition model. In De GrootAnette M. B.KrollJudit F. (eds.), Tutorials in bilingualism: Psycholinguistic perspectives, 113-142. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
41.
MurphyRaymond. 2012. English grammar in use. A self-study reference and practice book for intermediate learners of English. 4th edn.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
42.
NelsonGerald. 1996. The design of the corpus. In GreenbaumSidney (ed.), Comparing English worldwide: The International Corpus of English, 3-12. Oxford: Clarendon.
43.
OsseltonNoel. 1988. Thematic genitives. In NixonGrahamHoneyJohn (eds.), An historic tongue: Studies in English linguistics in memory of Barbara Strang, 138-144. London: Routledge.
44.
PakirAnne. 2001. The voices of English-knowing bilinguals and the emergence of new epicentres. In OoiVincent B. Y. (ed.), Evolving identities: The English language in Singapore and Malaysia, 1-11. Singapore: Times Academic Press.
45.
PatrickPeter L.2004. Jamaican Creole: Morphology and syntax. In KortmannBerndSchneiderEdgar W.UptonCliveMesthrieRajendBurridgeKate (eds.), A handbook of varieties of English, vol. 2, 407–438. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
46.
R Core Team. 2015. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Version 3.2.3, retrieved December2015 from http://www.R-project.org/.
47.
RosenbachAnette. 2002. Genitive variation in English: Conceptual factors in synchronic and diachronic studies. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
48.
RosenbachAnette. 2005. Animacy versus weight as determinants of grammatical variation in English. Language81(3). 613-644.
49.
RosenbachAnette. 2014. English genitive variation—The state of the art. English Language and Linguistics18(2). 215-262.
50.
SchneiderEdgar. 2007. Postcolonial English: Varieties around the world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
SzmalecArnaudMarcBrysbaertWouterDuyck. 2012. Working memory and (second) language processing. In AltarribaJeanetteIsurinLudmila (eds.), Memory, language, and bilingualism: Theoretical and applied approaches, 74-94. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
53.
SzmrecsanyiBenediktGrafmillerJasonHellerBenediktRöthlisbergerMelanie. 2016. Around the world in three alternations: Modeling syntactic variation in varieties of English. English World-Wide37(2). 109-137.
54.
SzmrecsanyiBenediktKortmannBernd. 2009. The morphosyntax of varieties of English worldwide: A quantitative perspective. Lingua119(11). 1643-1663.
55.
TagliamonteSaliBaayenHarald. 2012. Models, forests and trees of York English: “Was/were” variation as a case study for statistical practice. Language Variation and Change24(1). 135-178.
56.
ThomasRussel. 1931. Syntactical processes involved in the development of the adnominal periphrastic genitive in the English language. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan dissertation.
57.
TrudgillPeter. 2009. Vernacular universals and the sociolinguistic typology of English dialects. In FilppulaMarkkuKlemolaJuhaniPaulastoHeli (eds.), Vernacular universals and language contacts: Evidence from varieties of English and beyond, 302-329. London: Routledge.
58.
WasowThomas. 1997. Remarks on grammatical weight. Language Variation and Change9(1). 81-105.
59.
WolkChristophBresnanJoanRosenbachAnetteSzmrecsanyiBenedikt. 2013. Dative and genitive variability in Late Modern English: Exploring cross-constructional variation and change. Diachronica30(3). 382-419.
60.
ZuurAlain F.IenoElena N.WalkerNeil J.SavelievAnatoly A.SmithGraham M.2009. Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R. New York: Springer.
61.
ZwickyArnold M.1987. Suppressing the Zs. Journal of Linguistics23(1). 133-148.
