Preferred Argument Structure

Grammar as architecture for function

Editors

John W. Du Bois | University of California

Lorraine E. Kumpf | California State University

William J. Ashby | University of California

Hardbound – Available

ISBN 9789027226242 (Eur) | EUR 130.00

ISBN 9781588113696 (USA) | USD 195.00

e-Book –

ISBN 9789027296139 | EUR 130.00 | USD 195.00

Preferred Argument Structure offers a profound insight into the relationship between language use and grammatical structure. In his original publication on Preferred Argument Structure, Du Bois (1987) demonstrated the power of this perspective by using it to explain the origins of ergativity and ergative marking systems. Since this work, the general applicability of Preferred Argument Structure has been demonstrated in studies of language after language. In this collection, the authors move beyond verifying Preferred Argument Structure as a property of a given language. They use the methodology to reveal more subtle aspects of the patterns, for example, to look across languages, diachronically or synchronically, to examine particular grammatical relations, and to examine special populations or particular genres. This volume will appeal to linguists interested in the relationship of pragmatics and grammar generally, in the typology of grammatical relations, and in explanations derived from data- and corpus-based approaches to analysis.

[Studies in Discourse and Grammar, 14] 2003. ix, 458 pp.

Publishing status: Available
Published online on 21 October 2008

https://doi.org/10.1075/sidag.14

Table of Contents

Preface | p. vii

Abbreviations | p. ix

Introduction

John W. Du Bois, Lorraine E. Kumpf and William J. Ashby | pp. 1–10

Argument structure: Grammar in use

John W. Du Bois | pp. 11–60

Preferred Argument Structure across time and space: A comparative diachronic analysis of French and Spanish

William J. Ashby and Paola Bentivoglio | pp. 61–80

The lexicon in interaction: Developmental origins of Preferred Argument Structure in Korean

Patricia M. Clancy | pp. 81–108

Genre and Preferred Argument Structure: Sources of argument structure in classroom discourse

Lorraine E. Kumpf | pp. 109–130

Issues in the comparative argument structure analysis in Mayan narratives

Nora C. England and Laura Martin | pp. 131–157

New light on information pressure: Information conduits, “escape valves”, and role alignment stretching

Mark Durie | pp. 159–196

Beyond Preferred Argument Structure: Sentences, pronouns, and given referents in Nepali

Carol Genetti and Laura D. Crain | pp. 197–223

Multiple constraints on reference form: Null, pronominal, and full reference in Mapudungun

Jennifer E. Arnold | pp. 225–245

Argument splits in Finnish grammar and discourse

Marja-Liisa Helasvuo | pp. 247–272

Core arguments and the inversion of the nominal hierarchy in Roviana

Simon H. Corston-Oliver | pp. 273–300

Preferred Argument Structure in early Inuktitut spontaneous speech data

Shanley E.M. Allen and Heike Schröder | pp. 301–338

The role of Preferred Argument Structure for understanding aphasic sentence planning

Susan E. Kohn and Ana Cragnolino | pp. 339–351

Nominal information flow in the talk of two boys with autism

Elizabeth G. Weber | pp. 353–383

Tracking the deer: Nominal reference, parallelism and Preferred Argument Structure in Itzaj Maya narrative genres

Charles Andrew Hofling | pp. 385–410

Narrator virtuosity and the strategic exploitation of Preferred Argument Structure in Mocho: Repetition and constructed speech in Mocho narrative

Laura Martin | pp. 411–435

Name index | pp. 447–448

Language index | pp. 449–450

Subject index | pp. 451–458

“This volume is an important contribution to the field of discourse-grammar interaction because it adopts a crosslinguistic approach that neglects neither the (potential) universals nor the language-particular differences. [...], it teaches us a lot about how grammar-relevant discourse tendencies can be studied. Those who want to understand the discourse basis of grammar will want to take this line of research as one of their starting points.”

Martin Haspelmath, Max Planck Institute of Evolutionary Anthropology

Cited by (57)

Cited by 57 other publications

Order by:

Goldberg, Adele E.

2024. Usage-based constructionist approaches and large language models. Constructions and Frames 16:2 ► pp. 220 ff.

Duvallon, Outi & Il-Il Yatziv-Malibert

2023. Prolongements de la notion de paradigme : outil descriptif et théorique au-delà du français parlé. Travaux de linguistique n° 84-85:1 ► pp. 33 ff.

Fonseca-Greber, Bonnie B.

2023. William J. Ashby – A pioneer in diachronic Spoken French corpus linguistics. In On Spoken French [Studies in Language Companion Series, 226], ► pp. 1 ff.

Jiang, Xiangyu, Fen Zhang, Ruixia Yan & Liang Chen

2023. Preferred argument structure in the oral narratives of adolescents with and without SLI. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 37:4-6 ► pp. 513 ff.

Tsunoda, Tasaku

2023. Grammar (morphosyntax) and discourse. Studies in Language 47:4 ► pp. 830 ff.

Rodríguez Guerra, Alexandre

2022. Os suxeitos explícitos no galego medieval. Revista Galega de Filoloxía 23 ► pp. 144 ff.

Hörberg, Thomas & T. Florian Jaeger

2021. A Rational Model of Incremental Argument Interpretation: The Comprehension of Swedish Transitive Clauses. Frontiers in Psychology 12

Levshina, Natalia

2021. Communicative efficiency and differential case marking: a reverse-engineering approach. Linguistics Vanguard 7:s3

Levshina, Natalia

2022. Corpus-based typology: applications, challenges and some solutions. Linguistic Typology 26:1 ► pp. 129 ff.

Salazar-Orvig, Anne, Geneviève de Weck, Rouba Hassan & Annie Rialland

2021. Chapter 1. A dialogical approach to the acquisition and usage of referring expressions. In The Acquisition of Referring Expressions [Trends in Language Acquisition Research, 28],

Salazar-Orvig, Anne, Geneviève de Weck, Rouba Hassan & Annie Rialland

2021. Chapter 1. A dialogical approach to the acquisition and usage of referring expressions. In The Acquisition of Referring Expressions [Trends in Language Acquisition Research, 28], ► pp. 2 ff.

Helasvuo, Marja-Liisa

2020. Chapter 4. The noun phrase as an emergent unit in Finnish. In The ‘Noun Phrase’ across Languages [Typological Studies in Language, 128], ► pp. 72 ff.

Khanina, Olesya & Andrey Shluinsky

2020. Competing ditransitive constructions in Enets. Functions of Language 27:3 ► pp. 247 ff.

Malyuga, Elena N., Alex Krouglov & Maria V. Ivanova

2020. Functional and Linguistic Features of Humour in Economic Discourse. In Functional Approach to Professional Discourse Exploration in Linguistics, ► pp. 95 ff.

Jiang, Xiangyu & Liang Chen

2019. Preferred argument structure in the narratives of Chinese-English bilinguals and their monolingual peers. International Journal of Bilingualism 23:5 ► pp. 873 ff.

Vihman, Virve-Anneli & Diane Nelson

2019. Effects of Animacy in Grammar and Cognition: Introduction to Special Issue. Open Linguistics 5:1 ► pp. 260 ff.

Tang, Kevin & Ryan Bennett

2018. Contextual predictability influences word and morpheme duration in a morphologically complex language (Kaqchikel Mayan). The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 144:2 ► pp. 997 ff.

Ariel, Mira, Elitzur Dattner, John W. Du Bois & Tal Linzen

2015. Pronominal datives. Studies in Language 39:2 ► pp. 257 ff.

García-Miguel, José M.

2015. Variable coding and object alignment in Spanish: A corpus-based approach. Folia Linguistica 49:1

Green, Clarence

2015. An analysis of the relationship between cohesion and clause combination in English discourse employing NLP and data mining approaches. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 30:3 ► pp. 326 ff.

Maschler, Yael

2015. Word Order in Time. In Temporality in Interaction [Studies in Language and Social Interaction, 27], ► pp. 201 ff.

Bornkessel‐Schlesewsky, Ina & Matthias Schlesewsky

2014. Competition in argument interpretation: Evidence from the neurobiology of language. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, ► pp. 107 ff.

Cristofaro, Sonia

2014. Competing motivation models and diachrony: What evidence for what motivations?. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, ► pp. 282 ff.

Dressler, Wolfgang U., Gary Libben & Katharina Korecky‐Kröll

2014. Conflicting vs. convergent vs. interdependent motivations in morphology. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, ► pp. 180 ff.

Du Bois, John W.

2014. Motivating competitions. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, ► pp. 262 ff.

Francis, Elaine J. & Laura A. Michaelis

2014. Why move? How weight and discourse factors combine to predict relative clause extraposition in English. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, ► pp. 70 ff.

Haiman, John

2014. Six competing motives for repetition. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, ► pp. 246 ff.

Haspelmath, Martin

2014. On system pressure competing with economic motivation. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, ► pp. 197 ff.

Hawkins, John A.

2014. Patterns in competing motivations and the interaction of principles. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, ► pp. 54 ff.

Helmbrecht, Johannes

2014. Politeness distinctions in personal pronouns: A case study on competing motivations. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, ► pp. 315 ff.

Hughes, Mary E. & Shanley E. M. Allen

2014. Competing motivations in children's omission of subjects? The interaction between verb finiteness and referent accessibility. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, ► pp. 144 ff.

Kaltenböck, Gunther & Bernd Heine

2014. Sentence grammar vs. thetical grammar: Two competing domains?. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, ► pp. 348 ff.

Krajewski, Grzegorz & Elena Lieven

2014. Competing cues in early syntactic development. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, ► pp. 163 ff.

Kurumada, Chigusa & Inbal Arnon

2014. introduction Language acquisition in interaction. In Language in Interaction [Trends in Language Acquisition Research, 12], ► pp. 1 ff.

Lamers, Monique J. A. & Helen de Hoop

2014. Animate object fronting in Dutch: A production study. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, ► pp. 42 ff.

MacWhinney, Brian

2014. Conclusions: Competition across time. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, ► pp. 364 ff.

Brian MacWhinney, Andrej Malchukov & Edith Moravcsik

2014. Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage,

Malchukov, Andrej

2014. Resolving alignment conflicts: A competing motivations approach. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, ► pp. 16 ff.

Mondorf, Britta

2014. Apparently competing motivations in morphosyntactic variation. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, ► pp. 209 ff.

Moravcsik, Edith

2014. Introduction. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, ► pp. 1 ff.

Newmeyer, Frederick J.

2014. Where do motivations compete?. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, ► pp. 299 ff.

Pfeiffer, Martin

2014. Formal vs. functional motivations for the structure of self‐repair in German. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, ► pp. 229 ff.

Rowland, Caroline F., Claire Noble & Angel Chan

2014. Competition all the way down: How children learn word order cues to sentence meaning. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, ► pp. 127 ff.

Strunk, Jan

2014. A statistical model of competing motivations affecting relative clause extraposition in German. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, ► pp. 88 ff.

Hyams, Nina

2011. Missing Subjects in Early Child Language. In Handbook of Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition [Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics, 41], ► pp. 13 ff.

Torre, Enrico

2011. Grounding Meaning in Everyday Experience in the World: An Embodied Construction Grammar Analysis of Italian Caused-Motion Constructions. SSRN Electronic Journal

Ariel, Mira

2009. Discourse, grammar, discourse. Discourse Studies 11:1 ► pp. 5 ff.

Ariel, Mira

2014. Orconstructions: Monosemy vs. polysemy. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, ► pp. 333 ff.

Wang, Luming, Matthias Schlesewsky, Balthasar Bickel & Ina Bornkessel-Schlesewsky

2009. Exploring the nature of the ‘subject’-preference: Evidence from the online comprehension of simple sentences in Mandarin Chinese. Language and Cognitive Processes 24:7-8 ► pp. 1180 ff.

SHIBASAKI, REIJIROU

2006. THE EVOLUTION OF PREFERRED ARGUMENT STRUCTURE IN ENGLISH. ENGLISH LINGUISTICS 23:1 ► pp. 1 ff.

Tersis, Nicole & Shirley Carter‐Thomas

2005. Integrating Syntax and Pragmatics: Word Order and Transitivity Variations in Tunumiisut. International Journal of American Linguistics 71:4 ► pp. 445 ff.

[no author supplied]

2014. List of figures and tables. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, ► pp. xiv ff.

[no author supplied]

2014. Notes on contributors. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, ► pp. viii ff.

[no author supplied]

2014. Copyright Page. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, ► pp. iv ff.

[no author supplied]

2014. Preface. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, ► pp. vii ff.

[no author supplied]

2014. List of abbreviations. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, ► pp. xviii ff.

[no author supplied]

2023. Editor’s note – Section 6. In On Spoken French [Studies in Language Companion Series, 226], ► pp. 366 ff.

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 october 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.

Subjects