Cover not available
Article published In:
International Journal of Corpus Linguistics
Vol. 29:2 (2024) ► pp.258–285

Modeling the locative alternation in Mandarin Chinese

A corpus-based study

ORCID logo | China University of PetroleumBeijing
| Beihang University
| KU Leuven
The current study investigates the probabilistic conditioning of the Mandarin locative alternation. We adopt a corpus-based multivariate approach to analyze 2,836 observations of locative variants from a large Chinese corpus and annotated manually for various language-internal and language-external constraints. Multivariate modeling reveals that the Mandarin locative alternation is not only influenced by semantic predictors like affectedness and telicity, but also by previously unexplored syntactic and language-external constraints, such as complexity and animacy of locatum and location, accessibility of locatum, pronominality, definiteness of location, length ratio and register. Notably, the effects of affectedness, definiteness and pronominality are broadly parallel in both the Mandarin locative alternation and its English counterpart. We thus contribute to theorizing in corpus-based variationist linguistics by uncovering the probabilistic grammar of the locative alternation in Mandarin Chinese, and by identifying the constraints that may be universal across languages.
Keywords: locative alternation, corpus-based variationist linguistics, conditional random forest, mixed-effects logistic regression, Mandarin Chinese
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Locatum/location-as-object variants in the locative alternation
  • 3.Methods and data
    • 3.1The BCC corpus
    • 3.2The dataset
    • 3.3Explanatory factors
    • 3.4Statistical methods
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Frequencies and variant rates
    • 4.2About the overall importance of constraints: Conditional random forests (CRF) analysis
    • 4.3About effect directions and effect sizes: Mixed-effects logistic regression analysis
      • 4.3.1Fixed effects
      • 4.3.2Interaction terms
      • 4.3.3Random effects
  • 5.Discussion
    • 5.1Probabilistic effects of individual constraints
    • 5.2Interactions
    • 5.3Cross-linguistic universality
  • 6.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
Published online: 29 January 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.22072.xu
References (50)
References
Anderson, M. (1971). The Grammar of Case: Towards a Localistic Theory. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Arnold, J., Wasow, T., Losongco, A., & Ginstrom, R. (2000). Heaviness vs. newness: The effects of complexity and information structure on constituent ordering. Language, 76 (1), 28–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baayen, H. (2008). Analyzing Linguistic Data: A Practical Introduction to Statistics Using R. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67 (1), 1–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beavers, J. (2011). On affectedness. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 29 (2), 335–370. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D. (1994). An analytical framework for register studies. In D. Biber & E. Finegan (Eds.), Sociolinguistic Perspectives on Register (pp. 31–56). Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bresnan, J. (2007). Is syntactic knowledge probabilistic? Experiments with the English dative alternation. In S. Featherston & W. Sternefeld (Eds.), Roots: Linguistics in Search of its Evidential Base (pp. 75–96). De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bresnan, J., & Ford, M. (2010). Predicting syntax: Processing dative constructions in American and Australian varieties of English. Language, 86(1), 168–213. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bresnan, J., & Hay, J. (2008). Gradient grammar: An effect of animacy on the syntax of give in New Zealand and American English. Lingua, 118 (2), 245–259. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chen, P. (2004). Identifiability and definiteness in Chinese. Linguistics, 42 (6), 1129–1184 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, E. V., & Clark, H. H. (1979). When nouns surface as verbs. Language, 55 (4), 767–811. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
D’Elia, S. (2016). The Spray/load and Dative Alternations: Aligning VP Structure and Contextual Effects [Doctoral dissertation, University of Kent]. Kent Academic Repository. [URL]
Dowty, D. (1991). Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language, 67 (3), 547–619. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Engel, A., Grafmiller, J., Rosseel, L., & Szmrecsanyi, B. (2022). Assessing the complexity of lectal competence: The register-specificity of the dative alternation after give. Cognitive Linguistics, 33 (4), 727–766. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fang, Y., & Liu, H. (2021). Predicting syntactic choice in Mandarin Chinese: A corpus-based analysis of ba sentences and SVO sentences. Cognitive Linguistics, 32 (2), 219–250. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Givón, T. (1991). Isomorphism in the grammatical code: Cognitive and biological considerations. Studies in Linguistics, 15 (1), 85–114. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. (2002). Surface generalizations: An alternative to alternations. Cognitive Linguistics, 13 (4), 327–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gries, S. Th. (2015). The most under-used statistical method in corpus linguistics: Multi-level (and mixed-effects) models. Corpora, 10 (1), 95–125. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koch, P., & Oesterreicher, W. (1985). Sprache der Nähe – Sprache der Distanz: Mündlichkeitund Schriftlichkeit im Spannungsfeld von Sprachtheorie und Sprachgeschichte [Language of proximity – language of distance: Orality and writtenness in the interplay of language theory and language history]. Romanistisches Jahrbuch, 36 1, 15–43. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuo, P. (2019). On locative alternation verbs in Mandarin Chinese. Concentric, 45 (2), 141–166. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Labov, W. (1972). Sociolinguistic Patterns. University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Lambrecht, K. (1994). Information Structure and Sentence Form: Topic, Focus, and the Mental Representations of Discourse Referent. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levin, B., & Rappaport Hovav, M. (1991). Wiping the slate clean: A lexical semantic exploration. Cognition, 41 (1–3), 123–151. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1998). Morphology and Lexical Semantics. In A. Spencer & A. Zwicky (Eds.), The Handbook of Morphology (pp. 248–271). Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levshina, N. (2015). How to Do Linguistics with R. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, Y., Szmrecsanyi, B., & Zhang, W. (2023). The theme-recipient alternation in Mandarin Chinese: Tracking syntactic variation across seven centuries. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 19 (2), 207–235. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lin, X., Wang, L., & Sun, D. (1994). 现代汉语动词大词典 [Dictionary on verbs in Mandarin]. Beijing Language Institute Press.Google Scholar
Lu, J. (2016). 从语言信息结构视角重新认识“把”字句 [Re-understanding of the Ba-construction from an information structure perspective]. Language Teaching and Linguistic Studies, 1 1, 1–13.Google Scholar
Otani, N. (2020). A usage-based analysis of alternating syntactic constructions: The case of spray/load constructions and clear constructions. Gragoatá, 25 (52), 856–878. [URL]. DOI logo
Perek, F. (2012). Alternation-based generalizations are stored in the mental grammar: Evidence from a sorting task experiment. Cognitive Linguistics, 23 (3), 601–635. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pinker, S. (1989). Learnability and Cognition: The Acquisition of Argument Structure. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Pijpops, D., & Van de Velde, F. (2018). A multivariate analysis of the partitive genitive in Dutch: Bringing quantitative data into a theoretical discussion. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 14 (1), 99–131. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1972). A Grammar of Contemporary English. Longman.Google Scholar
Rappaport Hovav, M., & Levin, B. (1985). A Case Study in Lexical Analysis: The Locative Alternation. MIT Press.Google Scholar
R Core Team. (2014). R: A language and environment for statistical computing [Computer software]. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. [URL].Google Scholar
Rappaport Hovav, M., & Levin, B. (2010). Reflections on manner/result complementarity. In H. Rappaport Hovav, E. Doron, & I. Sichel (Eds.), Syntax, Lexical Semantics, and Event Structure (pp. 21–38). Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rohdenburg, G. (1996). Cognitive complexity and increased grammatical explicitness in English. Cognitive Linguistics, 7 (2), 149–182. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Röthlisberger, M., Grafmiller, J., & Szmrecsanyi, B. (2017). Cognitive indigenization effects in the English dative alternation. Cognitive Linguistics, 28 1, 673–710. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Szmrecsanyi, B., Grafmiller, J., Heller, B., & Röthlisberger, M. (2016). Around the world in three alternations: Modeling syntactic variation in varieties of English. English World-Wide, 37 (2), 109–137. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Szmrecsanyi, B. (2017). Variationist sociolinguistics and corpus-based variationist linguistics: Overlap and cross-pollination potential. Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique, 62 (4), 685–701. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, S. (2012). Variationist Sociolinguistics: Change, Observation, Interpretation. Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, S., & Baayen, H. (2012). Models, forests, and trees of York English: Was/were variation as a case study for statistical practice. Language Variation and Change , 24 (2), 135–178. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a Cognitive Semantics, vol. 1: Concept Structuring Systems. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Tenny, C. (1987). Grammaticalizing Aspect and Affectedness. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Tomlin, R. (1986). Basic Word Order: Functional Principles. Croon Helm. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Xu, F. (1998). 现代汉语置放动词配价研究 [On the Valence of Laying-verbs in Mandarin]. Language Learning and Research, 31, 86–11.Google Scholar
Xun, E., Rao, G., Xiao, X., & Zang, J. (2016). 大数据背景下BCC语料库的研制 [The construction of the BCC Corpus in the age of Big Data]. Corpus Linguistics, 31 (1), 93–118.Google Scholar
Zaenen, A., Carlette, J., Garretson, G., Bresnan, J., Koontz-Garboden, A., Nikitina, T., O’Connor, C., & Wasow, T. (2004). Animacy encoding in English: Why and how. In D. Byron & B. Webber (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2004 ACL Workshop on Discourse Annotation (pp. 118–125). Association for Computational Linguistics. [URL]. DOI logo
Zhang, D., & Xu, J. (2019). 英汉与格交替现象的多因素研究——逻辑回归分析 [A Multifactorial Study of Dative Alternation in English and Chinese]. Journal of Foreign Languages, 42 (2), 24–33.Google Scholar