Cover not available
Article published In:
Tense and aspect in Second Language Acquisition and Learner Corpus Research
Edited by Robert Fuchs and Valentin Werner
[International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 4:2] 2018
► pp. 225–252

Progressive or not progressive?

Modeling the constructional choices of EFL and ESL writers

| University of Eastern Finland
| Michigan State University
This multifactorial analysis of progressive marking contrasts native English to two Asian Englishes and Dutch English. Specifically, we (i) model writers’ constructional choices (progressive vs. non-progressive) across Englishes based on several linguistic predictors simultaneously, (ii) assess how those factors impact the progressive vs. non-progressive alternation, (iii) how several linguistic factors determine, simultaneously, writers’ constructional choices and (iv) how those choices differ across varieties and genres. Based on 4,661 verb constructions from five comparable multi-genre corpora, we ran a logistic regression analysis to determine which factors cause English-speaking populations to differ in their constructional choices and in which specific contexts. While the model strongly predicts speakers’ choices, within individual genres, tense and modality are found to influence speakers’ choices differently. Overall, our results yield nuanced insights into the (dis)similarities among and within ESL/EFL varieties and contribute to the broader issue of the native-foreign-second language continuum across genres.
Keywords: progressive vs. non-progressive, English as a native language, English as a second language, English as a foreign language, multivariate analysis
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The progressive in the ENL-ESL-EFL continuum: Previous research
  • 3.Progressive marking as a multifactorial phenomenon: Some theoretical and methodological insights
  • 4.Data and statistical approach
    • 4.1Corpora and extraction of data
    • 4.2Factors
    • 4.3Statistical modeling
  • 5.Results
    • 5.1Main effect: Semantic domain
    • 5.2Interactions
      • 5.2.1Interactions with genre
      • 5.2.2Constructional choices in the ENL-ESL-EFL continuum
  • 6.Discussion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 27 August 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ijlcr.16019.rau
References
Andersen, R. W. & Shirai, Y.
(1994) Discourse motivations for some cognitive acquisition principles. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 161, 133–156. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Anthony, L.
(2014) AntConc (Version 3.2.4) [Computer software]. Retrieved from [URL]
Bardovi-Harlig, K.
(2000) Tense and aspect in Second Language Acquisition. Form, meaning, and use. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E.
(1999) Longman Grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Binnick, R. I.
(1991) Time and the verb. A guide to tense and aspect. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Brinton, L. J.
(1988) The development of English aspectual systems. Aspectualizers and post-verbal particles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Collins, P.
(2008) The progressive aspect in World Englishes: A corpus-based study. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 28(2), 225–249. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crawley, M. J.
(2007) The R Book. Chichester: Wiley. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deshors, S. C.
(2017) Zooming in on verbs in the progressive: A collostructional and correspondence analysis approach. Journal of English Linguistics, 45(3), 260–290. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dose-Heidelmayer, S. & Götz, S.
(2016) The progressive in spoken learner language: A corpus-based analysis of use and misuse. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 54(3), 229–256. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dowty, D. R.
(1979) Word meaning and Montague grammar. The semantics of verbs and times in Generative Semantics and in Montague’s PTQ. Dordrecht: Reidel. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Edwards, A.
(2014) The progressive aspect in the Netherlands and the ESL/EFL continuum. World Englishes, 33(2), 173–194. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016) English in the Netherlands. Functions, forms and attitudes. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C. & Ferreira-Junior, F.
(2009) Constructions and their acquisitions. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 71, 187–220. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fuchs, R. & Gut, U.
(2015) An apparent time study of the progressive in Nigerian English. In P. Collins (Ed.), Grammatical change in English world-wide (pp. 373–387). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Gilquin, G. & Granger, S.
(2011) From EFL to ESL: Evidence from the International Corpus of Learner English. In J. Mukherjee & M. Hundt (Eds.), Exploring second-language varieties of English and learner Englishes. Bridging a paradigm gap (pp. 55–78). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A.
(2006) Constructions at work. The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Greenbaum, S.
(1991) The development of the International Corpus of English . In K. Aijmer, B. Altenberg, & J. Svartvik (Eds.), English corpus linguistics. Studies in honour of Jan Svartvik (pp. 83–91). London: Longman.Google Scholar
Gries, S. Th
(2009) Statistics for linguists with R. A practical introduction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gut, U. & Fuchs, R.
(2013) Progressive aspect in Nigerian English. Journal of English Linguistics, 41(3), 243–267. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harrell, F. E.
(2001) Regression modeling strategies. With applications to linear models, logistic regression, and survival analysis. New York: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Housen, A.
(2002) The acquisition of tense-aspect in English as a second language and the variable influence of inherent aspect. In R. Salaberry & Y. Shirai (Eds.), The L2 acquisition of tense-aspect morphology (pp. 155–197). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hundt, M. & Vogel, K.
(2011) Overuse of the progressive in ESL and learner Englishes – fact or fiction? In J. Mukherjee & M. Hundt (Eds.), Exploring second-language varieties of English and learner Englishes. Bridging a paradigm gap (pp. 145–165). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hundt, M. & Rautionaho, P.
(2016, May) Progressively progressive? A corpus-based study of the progressive in World Englishes. Paper presented at ICAME 37 conference, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, China.
Jenkins, J.
(2009) English as a lingua franca. Interpretations and attitudes. World Englishes, 28(2), 200–207. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kranich, S.
(2010) Progressive in modern English. A corpus-based study of grammaticalization and related changes. Amsterdam: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, S. -A.
(2015) Aktionsart, progressive aspect and underspecification. Linguistic Research, 32(1), 151–193. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leech, G., Hundt, M., Mair, C., & Smith, N.
(2009) Change in contemporary English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levin, B.
(1993) English verb classes and alternations. A preliminary investigation. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Mair, C. & Hundt, M.
(1995) Why is the progressive becoming more frequent in English: A corpus-based investigation of language change in progress. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik, 21, 111–122.Google Scholar
Meriläinen, L., Paulasto, H., & Rautionaho, P.
(2017) Extended uses of the progressive form in Inner, Outer and Expanding Circle Englishes. In M. Filppula, J. Klemola, A. Mauranen, & S. Vetchinnikova (Eds.), Changing English. Global and local perspectives (pp. 191–216). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mukherjee, J. & Hundt, M.
(Eds.) (2011) Exploring second-language varieties of English and learner Englishes. Bridging a paradigm gap. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Muñoz, C. & Gilabert, R.
(2011) More evidence concerning the Aspect Hypothesis: The acquisition of English progressive aspect by Catalan-Spanish instructed learners. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 491, 241–263. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paulasto, H.
(2014) Extended uses of the progressive in L1 and L2 Englishes. English World-Wide, 35(3), 247–276. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J.
(1985) A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Rautionaho, P.
(2014) Variation in the progressive. A corpus-based study into World Englishes. Tampere: Tampere University Press.Google Scholar
Rohdenburg, G.
(2003) Cognitive complexity and horror aequi as factors determining the use of interrogative clause linkers in English. In G. Rohdenburg & B. Mondorf (Eds.), Determinants of grammatical variation in English (pp. 205–249). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Rooy, B.
(2006) The extension of the progressive aspect in Black South African English. World Englishes, 25(1), 37–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014) Progressive aspect and stative verbs in Outer Circle varieties. World Englishes, 33(2), 157–172. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Salles Bernal, S.
(2015) Synchronic analysis of the progressive aspect in three varieties of Asian Englishes. Miscelánea: A Journal of English and American Studies, 511, 87–107.Google Scholar
Schilk, M. & Hammel, M.
(2014) The progressive in South Asian and Southeast Asian varieties of English: Mapping areal homogeneity and heterogeneity. Language and Computers, 78(1), 147–171.Google Scholar
Schneider, G. & Hundt, M.
(2012) “Off with their heads”: Profiling TAM in ICE corpora. In M. Hundt & U. Gut (Eds.), Mapping unity and diversity world-wide. Corpus-based studies of New Englishes (pp. 1–34). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schneider, E. W.
(2007) Postcolonial English. Varieties around the world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sharma, D.
(2009) Typological diversity in New Englishes. English World-Wide, 30(2), 170–195. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shirai, Y. & Andersen, R. W.
(1995) The acquisition of tense-aspect morphology: A prototype account. Language, 71(4), 743–762. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smitterberg, E.
(2005) The progressive in 19th-century English. A process of integration. Amsterdam: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sridhar, K. K. & Sridhar, S. N.
(1986) Bridging the paradigm gap: Second language acquisition research and indigenized varieties of English. World Englishes, 5(1), 3–14. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, M.
(2000) Do young children have adult syntactic competence? Cognition, 741, 209–253. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vendler, Z.
(1957) Verbs and times. The Philosophical Review, 66(2), 143–160. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 7 other publications

Deshors, Sandra C. & Paula Rautionaho
2018. The progressive versus non-progressive alternation. English World-Wide. A Journal of Varieties of English 39:3 ► pp. 309 ff. DOI logo
Díez-Bedmar, María Belén
2021. The Use of the Progressive in Light of the AH in Monolingual EFL-Instructed Spanish Learners at University Level: A Longitudinal Learner Corpus-Based SLA Study. Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación 87 ► pp. 53 ff. DOI logo
Hundt, Marianne, Paula Rautionaho & Carolin Strobl
2020. Progressive or simple? A corpus-based study of aspect in World Englishes. Corpora 15:1 ► pp. 77 ff. DOI logo
Le Foll, Elen
2021. Register variation in school EFL textbooks. Register Studies 3:2 ► pp. 207 ff. DOI logo
Le Foll, Elen
2022. “I’m putting some salt in my sandwich”.. In Broadening the Spectrum of Corpus Linguistics [Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 105], ► pp. 92 ff. DOI logo
Rautionaho, Paula & Marianne Hundt
2022. Primed progressives? Predicting aspectual choice in World Englishes. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 18:3 ► pp. 599 ff. DOI logo
Wu, Tianqi & Min Wang
2022. Development of the progressive construction in Chinese EFL learners’ written production: From prototypes to marginal members. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 18:2 ► pp. 307 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 26 november 2023. 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.