To be specified published in:
English Text Construction
Vol. 10:1 (2017) ► pp. 132–164
article

Structuring subjectivity in Asian Englishes

Multivariate approaches to mental predicates across genres and functional uses

| New Mexico State University
This study investigates the usage patterns of four near-synonymous mental predicates (believe, guess, suppose and think) across three Asian ESL (English as a Second Language) varieties as well as British and American Englishes. Using two multivariate techniques, multiple correspondence analysis and classification and regression tree analysis, the study shows the benefits of exploring cross-varietal variation through the lens of lexicalization patterns. The study also demonstrates that to make sense of semantic patterns it is crucial to account for extra-linguistic factors such as genre, as different ESL writers structure the meaning of believe, guess, suppose and think differently depending on their type of writing. Ultimately, in the broader context of the emancipation of ESL varieties, the results raise important questions about the developmental process of Asian Englishes and the place that semantic structure holds in this endeavor.
Keywords: Asian Englishes, classification and regression tree, mental predicates, multiple correspondence analysis, written genres
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Adopting a semantic perspective on cross-varietal variation in ESL: The case of mental predicates
    • 2.1The conceptual make-up of epistemic stance expressions: Believe, guess, suppose and think
    • 2.2Variation in the use of mental predicates: What are the triggering factors?
    • 2.3Towards an exploration of semantic variation across Asian Englishes
  • 3.Methodology
    • 3.1Corpus data and annotation
    • 3.2Statistical evaluation
      • 3.2.1(Multiple) Correspondence Analysis
      • 3.2.2Classification And Regression Tree
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Joint Multiple Correspondence Analysis
    • 4.2Classification and regression tree analysis
  • 5.Discussion and concluding remarks
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • References


This article is currently available as a sample article.

Published online: 15 June 2017
https://doi.org/10.1075/etc.10.1.07des
References
Aijmer, Karin
1997  I think – An English modal particle. In Modality in Germanic Languages: Historical and Comparative Perspectives, Toril Swan & Olaf J. Westvik (eds). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1–48. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Benzécri, Jean-Paul
1973 L’analyse des données, 2. L’analyse des correspondances. Paris: Dunod.Google Scholar
1984 Analyse des correspondances, exposé élémentaire (2nd ed.). Paris: Dunod.Google Scholar
Bernaisch, Tobias & Stefan Th. Gries
2016 Exploring epicenters empirically: Focus on South Asian Englishes. English World-Wide 37 (1): 1–25. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bernaisch, Tobias, Stefan Th. Gries & Joybrato Mukherjee
2014 The dative alternation in South Asian English(es): Modelling predictors and predicting prototypes. English World-Wide 35 (1): 7–31. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas & Edward Finegan
1989 Styles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect. Text 91: 93–124. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad & Edward Finegan
1999 Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Biermeier, Thomas
2008 Word-formation in New Englishes – A Corpus-based Analysis. Berlin, Münster: LIT.Google Scholar
2009 Word-formation in New Englishes. Properties and trends. In World Englishes – Problems, Properties and Prospects: Selected Papers from the 13th IAWE Conference, Thomas Hoffmann & Lucia Siebers (eds). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 331–349. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2014 Compounding and suffixation in World Englishes. In The Evolution of Englishes: The Dynamic Model and Beyond, Sarah Buschfeld, Thomas Hoffmann, Magnus Huber & Alexander Kautzsch (eds). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 312–330. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brezina, Vaclav
2013 Certainty and uncertainty in spoken language: In search of epistemic sociolect and idiolect. In Variation in Language and Language Use, Monika Reif, Justyna A. Robinson & Martin Pütz (eds). Frankfurt and Main: Peter Lang, 97–128.Google Scholar
Bucholtz, Mary & Kira Hall
2005 Identity and interaction: A socio-cultural linguistic approach. Discourse Studies 7 (4–5): 585–614. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan, Revere Perkins & William Pagliuca
1994 The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect and Modality in the Languages of the World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Callies, Marcus
2016 Towards a process-oriented approach to comparing EFL and ESL varieties: A corpus-study of lexical innovations. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 2 (2): 229–251. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chafe, Wallace
1986 Evidentiality in English conversation and academic writing. In Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology, Wallace Chafe & Johanna Nichols (eds). New York: Able, 261–272.Google Scholar
Coates, Jennifer
1983 The Semantics of the Modal Auxiliaries. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Conrad, Susan & Douglas Biber
2000 Adverbial marking of stance in speech and writing. In Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse, Susan Hunston & Geoff Thompson (eds). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 56–73.Google Scholar
DeCarrico, Jeanette S.
1986 Tense, aspect, and time in the English modality system. TESOL Quarterly 20 (4): 665–682. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Deshors, Sandra C. & Stefan Th. Gries
2016 Profiling verb complementation constructions across New Englishes: A two-step random forests analysis of –ing vs. –to complements. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 21 (2): 192–218. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Divjak, Dagmar
2010 Structuring the Lexicon: A Clustered Model for Near-Synonymy. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Divjak, Dagmar & Stefan Th. Gries
2009 Corpus-based cognitive semantics: A contrastive study of phrasal verbs in English and Russian. In Studies in Cognitive Corpus Linguistics, Barbara Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk & Katarzyna Dziwirek (eds). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 273–296.Google Scholar
Du Bois, John
2007 The stance triangle. In Stancetaking in Discourse: Subjectivity, Evaluation, Interaction, Robert Englebretson (ed.). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 138–183. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Englebretson, Robert
(ed.) 2007 Stancetaking in Discourse: Subjectivity, Evaluation, Interaction. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fortescue, Michael
2001 Thoughts about thought. Cognitive Linguistics 121: 15–45. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gablasova, Dana, Vaclav Brezina, Tony McEnery & Elaine Boyd
2015 Epistemic stance in spoken L2 English: The effect of task and speaker style. Applied Linguistics: 1–26. http://​applij​.oxfordjournals​.org​/content​/early​/2015​/10​/31​/applin​.amv055​.full​.pdf+htm〉 (Last accessed on 4 December 2016).Google Scholar
Glynn, Dylan
2014a Correspondence analysis: Exploring data and identifying patterns. In Corpus Methods for Semantics: Quantitative Studies in Polysemy and Synonymy, Dylan Glynn & Justyna Robinson (eds). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 443–485. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2014b Techniques and tools: Corpus methods and statistics for semantics. In Corpus Methods for Semantics: Quantitative Studies in Polysemy and Synonymy, Dylan Glynn & Justyna Robinson (eds). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 307–341. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gonzáles, Montserrat, Paolo Roseano, Jan Barràs & Pilar Prieto
2014 Epistemic and evidential marking in discourse: Effects of register and debatability. Lingua CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Charles & Marjorie H. Goodwin
1992 Assessments and the construction of context. In Rethinking Context: Language as an Interactive Phenomenon, Alessandro Duranti & Charles Goodwin (eds). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 147–189.Google Scholar
Goodwin, Marjorie H.
2006 The Hidden Life of Girls: Games of Stance, Status, and Exclusion. Oxford: Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Greenacre, Michael
2006 From simple to multiple correspondence analysis. In Multiple Correspondence Analysis and Related Methods, Michael Greenacre & Jorg Blasius (eds). London: Chapman & Hall, 41–76. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2007 Correspondence Analysis in Practice (2nd ed.). Boca Raton: Chapman & Hall/CRC. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Greenbaum, Sidney
1991 ICE: The International Corpus of English. English Today 7 (4): 3–7. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th
2006 Corpus-based methods and cognitive semantics: The many meanings of to run . In Corpora in Cognitive Linguistics: Corpus-Based Approaches to Syntax and Lexis, Stefan Th. Gries & Anatol Stefanowitsch (eds). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 57–99. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Horch, Stephanie
2016 Innovative conversions in South-East Asian Englishes: Reassessing ESL status. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 2 (2): 278–301. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hsieh, Chia-Ling
2009 Epistemic stance taking in Chinese media discourse. Linguistic Theory Research 31: 1–35. 〈http://​web​.ntnu​.edu​.tw​/~clhsieh​/2​_Research​/2​.1​_Publication​/A07​_2009​.12​_RTL​.pdf〉 (Last accessed on 4 December 2016).Google Scholar
Hunston, Susan & John Sinclair
2000 A local grammar of evaluation. In Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse, Susan Hunston & Geoff Thompson (eds). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 74–101.Google Scholar
Hunston, Susan & Geoff Thompson
2000 Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kärkkäinen, Elise
2003a ‘Is she vicious or dense?’: Dialogic practices of stance taking in conversation. In Santa Barbara Papers in Linguistics 12: Recent Studies in Empirical Approaches to Language, Toshihide Nakayama, Tsuyoshi Ono & Hongyun Tao (eds). Santa Barbara: University of California, Santa Barbara, 47–65.Google Scholar
2003b Epistemic Stance in English Conversation: A Description of its Interactional Functions, with a Focus on ‘I think’. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006 Stance taking in conversation: From subjectivity to intersubjectivity. Text & Talk 261: 699–731. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Krawczak, Karolina
2014 Epistemic stance predicates in English: A quantitative corpus-driven study of subjectivity. In Subjectivity and Epistemicity: Corpus, Discourse, and Literary Approaches to Stance, Dylan Glynn & Mette Sjölin (eds). Lund: Lund University Press, 303–328.Google Scholar
Labov, William & Joshua Waletzky
1967 Narrative analysis: Oral versions of personal experience. In Essays on the Verbal and Visual Arts, June Helm (ed.). Seattle: University of Washington Press, 12–44.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W.
1999 Grammar and Conceptualization. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009 Investigations in Cognitive Grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Leimgruber, Jacob R. E.
2011 Singapore English. Languages and Linguistics Compass 5 (1): 47–62. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Linde, Charlotte
1997 Evaluation as linguistic structure and social practice. In The Constructional of Professional Discourse, Britt-Louise Gunnarsson, Per Linell & Bengt Nordberg (eds). New York: Addison Wesley Longman, 151–172.Google Scholar
Lyons, John
1977 Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Macken-Horarik, Mary & J. R. Martin
2003 Negotiating Heteroglossia: Social Perspectives on Evaluation. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Marín-Arrese, Juana
2009 Effective vs. epistemic stance and subjectivity/intersubjectivity in political discourse: A case study. In Studies on English Modality, Anastasios Tsangalidis & Roberta Facchinetti (eds). Berlin: Peter Lang, 23–52.Google Scholar
2011 Effective vs. epistemic stance and subjectivity in political discourse: Legitimising strategies and mystification of responsibility. In Critical Discourse Studies in Context and Cognition, Christopher Hart (ed.). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 193–223. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2015 Epistemicity and stance: A cross-linguistic study of epistemic stance strategies in journalistic discourse in English and Spanish. Discourse Studies 17 (2): 210–225. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mukherjee, Joybrato & Stefan Th. Gries
2009 Collostructional nativisation in New Englishes: Verb-construction associations in the International Corpus of English. English World-Wide 301: 27–51. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mukherjee, Joybrato & Marco Schilk
2008 Verb-complementational profiles across varieties of English: Comparing verb classes in Indian English and British English. In The Dynamics of Linguistic Variation: Corpus Evidence on English Past and Present, Terttu Nevalainen, Irma Taavitsainen, Päivi Pahta & Minna Korhonen (eds). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 163–181. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nuyts, Johan
2001 Subjectivity as an evidential dimension in epistemic modal expressions. Journal of Pragmatics 331: 383–400. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Okunrinmeta, Uriel
2013 Izon influences in Nigerian English syntax. English Language and Literature Studies 31: 30–43. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2014 Syntactic and lexico-semantic variations in Nigerian English: Implications and challenges in the ESL classroom. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics 41: 317–332. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Palmer, Frank
1990 Modality and the English Modals. 2nd ed.. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Phelps, Mandy & Edgar Merkle
2008 Classification and regression trees as alternatives to regression. Proceedings of the 4 th Annual GRASP Symposium , Wichita State University.
Põldvere, Nele
2013 Stance-taking and social status on an online bulletin board: A qualitative and quantitative approach. Unpublished Master’s Thesis. Lund University.Google Scholar
R Development Core Team
2015 R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. 〈http://​www​.R​-project​.org〉.
Sanders, José & Wilbert Spooren
1996 Subjectivity and certainty in epistemic modality: A study of Dutch epistemic modifiers. Cognitive Linguistics 7 (3): 241–264. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Scheibman, Joanne
2002 Point of View and Grammar: Structural Patterns of Subjectivity in American English Conversation. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schilk, Marco, Tobias Bernaisch & Joybrato Mukherjee
2012 Mapping unity and diversity in South Asian English lexicogrammar. In Mapping Unity and Diversity World-wide: Corpus-based Studies of New Englishes, Marianne Hundt & Ulrike Gut (eds). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 137–166. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, Edgar W.
2007 Postcolonial English: Varieties around the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Simon-Vandenbergen, Anne-Marie
1997 Modal (un)certainty in political discourse: A functional account. Language Sciences 19 (4): 341–356. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Geoff & Susan Hunston
2000 Evaluation: An introduction. In Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse, Susan Hunston & Geoff Thompson (eds). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1–27.Google Scholar
Timofeev, Roman
2004 Classification and Regression Trees (CART): Theory and Applications. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Humboldt University, Berlin.Google Scholar
Werner, Janina & Joybrato Mukherjee
2012 Highly polysemous verbs in New Englishes: A corpus-based study of Sri Lankan and Indian English. In Corpus Linguistics: Looking back – Moving forward, Sebastian Hoffmann, Paul Rayson & Geoffrey Leech (eds). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Rodopi, 249–266. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Full-text

Structuring subjectivity in Asian Englishes
Cited by

Cited by 4 other publications

No author info given
2021.  In Corpora, Constructions, New Englishes [Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 100], Crossref logo
Deshors, Sandra C. & Sandra Götz
2020. Common ground across globalized English varieties: A multivariate exploration of mental predicates in World Englishes. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 16:1 ► pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Gries, Stefan Th., Tobias Bernaisch & Benedikt Heller
2018.  In Modeling World Englishes [Varieties of English Around the World, G61], ► pp. 245 ff. Crossref logo
Götz, Sandra
2017. Non-Canonical Syntax in South Asian Varieties of English: A Corpus-Based Pilot Study on Fronting. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 65:3 ► pp. 265 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 08 april 2022. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.