Cover not available
Article published In:
English World-Wide
Vol. 41:2 (2020) ► pp.225–254

The bike, the back, and the boyfriend

Confronting the “definite article conspiracy” in Canadian and British English

| KU Leuven
| University of Toronto
Using comparative sociolinguistic methods, we probe the underlying mechanisms governing the variation between possessive determiners, my bike, and the definite article, the bike, in possessive contexts in two mainstream English varieties (Canadian and British English, N = 6,217). Results indicate the is stable and pervasive, occurring approximately 30 percent of the time with personal domain possessed nouns. For some nouns, e.g. dog and cat, the occurs over 75 percent of the time. The Canadian Oxford Dictionary records possessive the as chiefly British, while Quirk et al. (1985: 271–272) observe that only low-status men use it; however, we find no difference between the UK and Canada, nor a significant gender or education effect in either dataset. When we model the variation between forms according to conceptions of ownership, we find an underlying system for encoding communal possession that transcends social categories and dialect: the more that possession is communal, the more the is used.
Keywords: definite article, determiners, possession, British English, Canadian English, comparative sociolinguistics, varieties of English, English dialects, alienability
Article outline
  • 1.The “definite article conspiracy”
  • 2.Descriptive and prescriptive English language references
  • 3.Possession and definiteness across Indo-European languages
    • 3.1Typology
    • 3.2Personal domain and prototypical possession
  • 4.Data and method
  • 5.Results
    • 5.1Frequency and time
    • 5.2Style or register/users
    • 5.3Possessum
    • 5.4Syntactic position
    • 5.5Possessor grammatical person
    • 5.6Statistical analyses
      • 5.6.1Random forest analysis
      • 5.6.2Regression analysis
  • 6.Discussion
    • 6.1Communal possession
  • 7.Conclusion
    • 7.1New description
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • Sources
  • References
Published online: 9 June 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.00047.gar
References (68)
Sources
Tagliamonte, Sali A. 2000–2001. Vernacular Roots: A Database of British Dialects. Research Grant. Arts & Humanities Research Board of the United Kingdom (AHRB) Research Grant. #041R00383.Google Scholar
2003–2006. Linguistic changes in Canada Entering the 21st Century. Research Grant. Social Sciences & Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC). #410-2003-0005.Google Scholar
References
Abate, Frank, ed. 1999. The Oxford American Dictionary of Current English (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Alexander, Louis G. 1988. Longman English Grammar. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Algeo, John. 2006. British or American English? A Handbook of Word and Grammar Patterns. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Anthony, Laurence. 2005. “AntConc: Design and Development of a Freeware Corpus Analysis Toolkit for the Tenchinal Writing Classroom”. Proceedings of the International Professional Communication Conference (IPCC), 729–737.Google Scholar
. 2006. AntConc (Version 3.2.0). Tokyo: Waseda University <[URL]>.
Ayto, John. 1998. The Oxford Dictionary of Slang. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Balley, Charles. 1926. “L’expression des idées de sphère personnelle et de solidarité dans les langues indoeuropéenes”. In Franz Frankhauser, and Jakob Jud, eds. Festschrift Louis Gauchat. Aarau: Sauerländer, 68–78.Google Scholar
Barber, Katerine, ed. 2004. The Canadian Oxford Dictionary (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bates, Douglas M., Martin Maechler, Ben Bolker, and Steve Walker. 2015. “Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4 ”. Journal of Statistical Software 671: 1–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad, and Edward Finegan. 1999. The Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Bright, James W. 1917. An Anglo-Saxon Reader (4th ed.). New York: Henry Holt & Company.Google Scholar
Chappell, Hilary and William McGregory. 1996. “Prolegomena to a Theory of Inalienability and Nominal Classification”. In Hilary Chappell, and William McGregory, eds. The Grammar of Inalienability: A Typological Perspective on Body Part Terms and the Part-Whole Relation. Berlin: De Gruyter, 3–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
D’Arcy, Alexandra and Sali A. Tagliamonte. 2015. “Not Always Variable: Probing the Vernacular Grammar”. Language Variation and Change 271: 255–285. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dahl, Östen and Maria Koptjevskaja-Tamm. 2001. “Kinship in Grammar”. In Irène Baron, Michael Herslund, and Finn Sørensen, eds. Dimensions of Possession. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 201–226. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Delport, Mary-France. 1996. “Alternation Between the Possessive and the Article in Spanish”. Cahiers de praxematique 271: 35–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deverson, Tony and Graeme Kennedy. 2005. The New Zealand Oxford Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eastwood, John. 2002. The Oxford Guide to English Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Filppula, Markku. 2002. The Grammar of Irish English: Language in Hibernian Style. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fowler, Henry W. 1998. The New Fowler’s Modern Usage: Revised Edition (3rd ed.). Edited by Robert W. Burchfield. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fruehwald, Josef and Joel C. Wallenberg. 2013. “Optionality Is Stable Variation is Competing Grammars”. Paper presented at 25th Scandinavian Conference in Linguistics, University of Iceland.
Gardiner, Shayna and Naomi Nagy. 2017. “Stable Variation vs. Language Change and the Factors that Constrain Them”. Penn Working Papers in Linguistics: Selected Papers from New Ways of Analyzing Variation (NWAV 45) 231: Article 10.Google Scholar
Grafmiller, Jason. 2014. “Variation in English Genitives across Modality and Genres”. English Language and Linguistics 181: 471–496. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grannis, Oliver C. 1972. “The Definite Article Conspiracy in English”. Language Learning 221: 275–289. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Green, Jonathon. 2010. Green’s Dictionary of Slang. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Haiman, John. 1985. Natural Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 1999. “External Possession in a European Areal Perspective”. In Immanuel Barshi, and Doris Payne, eds. External Possession. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 109–135. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin, Ekkehard König, Wulf Oesterreicher, and Wolfgang Raible, eds. 2001. Language Typology and Language Universals: An International Handbook. Vol. 11. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hickey, Raymond. 2007. Irish English: History and Present-Day Forms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hothorn, Torsten, Frank Bretz, and Peter Westfall. 2008. “Simultaneous Inference in General Parametric Models”. Biometrical Journal 501: 346–363. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hudson, Kenneth. 1977. Dictionary of Diseased English. London: Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kellner, Leon. 1892. Historical Outlines of English Syntax. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
König, Ekkehard and Martin Haspelmath. 1997. “Les constructions à possesseur externe dans les languages d’Europe”. In Jack Feuillet, ed. Actance et valence dans les languages de l’Europe. Berlin: De Gruyter, 525–606.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1966. The Social Stratification of English in New York City. Washington: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
. 1990. “The Intersection of Sex and Social Class in the Course of Linguistic Change”. Language Variation and Change 21: 205–254. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2001. Principles of Linguistic Change. Vol 2: Social Factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
McColl Miller, Robert. 2007. Northern and Insular Scots. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McWhorter, John H. 2002. “What Happened to English?”. Diachronica 191: 217–272. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Merriam-Webster Online. <[URL]> (accessed 26 November, 2018).
Moore, Bruce. 2004. Australian Oxford Dictionary (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. 1988. “On Alienable and Inalienable Possession”. In William Shipley, ed. In Honor of Mary Haas: From the Haas Festival Conference on Native American Linguistics. Berlin: De Gruyter, 475–521. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1992. Linguistic Diversity in Space and Time. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Procter, Paul, ed. 2014. Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English: For Advanced Learners (6th ed.). Harlow: Pearson Longman.Google Scholar
Purves, David. 2002. A Scots Grammar: Scots Grammar & Usage. Revised and extended edition. Edinburgh: Bell & Bain.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolf and Charles L. Wren. 1957. An Old English Grammar (2nd ed.). London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolf, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartik. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
R Core Team. 2018. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing <[URL]>.
Rosenbach, Anette. 2002. Genitive Variation in English: Conceptual Factors in Synchronic and Diachronic Studies. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rupp, Laura and Sali A. Tagliamonte. 2019. ““They Used to Follow Ø River”: The Zero Article in York English”. Journal of English Linguistics 471: 279–300. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seiler, Hansjakob. 1983. Possession as an Operational Dimension of Language. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Seržant, Ilja A. 2016. “External Possession and Constructions: That May Have It”. STUF – Language Typology and Universals 691: 131–169.Google Scholar
Stevenson, Angus, ed. 2010. Oxford Dictionary of English (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Stevenson, Angus, and Christine A. Lindberg, eds. 2010. New Oxford American Dictionary (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Strobl, Carolin, James Malley, and Gerhard Tutz. 2009. “An Introduction to Recursive Partitioning: Rationale, Application, and Characteristics of Classification and Regression Trees, Bagging, and Random Forests”. Psychological Methods 141: 323–348. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Strobl, Carolin, Annle-Laure Boulesteix, Achim Zeileis, and Torsten Hothorn. 2007. “Bias in Random Forest Variable Importance Measures: Illustrations, Sources, and a Solution”. BMC Bioinformatics 81: Article 25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swan, Michael. 1996. Practical English Usage: International Student’s Edition (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A. 2012. Variationist Sociolinguistics: Change, Observation, Interpretation. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A. and R. Harald Baayen. 2012. “Models, Forests, and Trees of York English: Was/Were Variation as a Case Study for Statistical Practice”. Language Variation and Change 241: 135–178. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A. and Rebecca Roeder. 2009. “Variation in the English Definite Article: Socio-Historical Linguistics in t’Speech Community”. Journal of Sociolinguistics 131: 435–471. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Todd, Loreto and Ian Hancock. 1986. International English Usage. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Tomaschek, Fabian, Peter Hendrix, and R. Harald Baayen. 2018. “Strategies for Addressing Collinearity in Multivariate Linguistic Data”. Journal of Phonetics 711: 249–267. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth C. 1999. “Syntax”. In Suzanne Romaine, ed. The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol. 41: 1776–1997. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 168–289.Google Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. 1974. The Social Differentiation of English in Norwich. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Uhlenbeck, Christianus Cornelius. 1917. “Het Identificeerend Karakter der Possessieve Flexie in Talen van Noord-Amerika”. Verslagen en Mededeelingen der Koninklijke Akademie van Wetenschappen, Afdeeling Letterkunde 51: 345–376.Google Scholar
Van Valin, Robert D., Jr. and Randy J. LaPolla. 1997. Syntax: Structure, Meaning and Function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wallenberg, Joel C. 2013. “A Unified Theory of Stable Variation, Syntactic Optionality, and Syntactic Change”. Paper presented at the 15th Diachronic Generative Syntax Conference, University of Ottawa.
Wolk, Christoph, Joan Bresnan, Anette Rosenbach, and Benedikt Szmrecsanyi. 2013. “Dative and Genitive Variability in Late Modern English: Exploring Cross-Constructional Variation and Change”. Diachronica 301: 382–419. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Hunt, Matthew & Eric K. Acton
2022. “How's the wife?”: Pragmatic reasoning in spousal reference. Journal of Pragmatics 188 ► pp. 152 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 2024. 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.