The great regression
-
Benedikt Szmrecsanyi
Abstract
Utilizing the variationist method, this contribution is concerned with the alternation between the s-genitive (the president’s speech) and the of-genitive (the speech of the president) in Late Modern English news prose as sampled in ARCHER. A frequency analysis reveals that text frequencies of the s-genitive collapsed in the early 19th century, but recovered afterwards. Linear regression analysis indicates that slightly over half of this frequency variability is induced by “environmental” changes in the news genre habitat, such as varying input frequencies of human possessors. To investigate the remaining variability, we fit a logistic regression model and show that genitive choice grammars changed genuinely in regard to four language-internal conditioning factors: POSSESSOR ANIMACY, GENITIVE RELATION, POSSESSUM LENGTH, and POSSESSOR THEMATICITY. Applying customary grammaticalization diagnostics, we conclude that while the s-genitive was subject to grammaticalization in the 19th century, it actually degrammaticalized during the 20th century.
Abstract
Utilizing the variationist method, this contribution is concerned with the alternation between the s-genitive (the president’s speech) and the of-genitive (the speech of the president) in Late Modern English news prose as sampled in ARCHER. A frequency analysis reveals that text frequencies of the s-genitive collapsed in the early 19th century, but recovered afterwards. Linear regression analysis indicates that slightly over half of this frequency variability is induced by “environmental” changes in the news genre habitat, such as varying input frequencies of human possessors. To investigate the remaining variability, we fit a logistic regression model and show that genitive choice grammars changed genuinely in regard to four language-internal conditioning factors: POSSESSOR ANIMACY, GENITIVE RELATION, POSSESSUM LENGTH, and POSSESSOR THEMATICITY. Applying customary grammaticalization diagnostics, we conclude that while the s-genitive was subject to grammaticalization in the 19th century, it actually degrammaticalized during the 20th century.
Chapters in this book
- Prelim pages i
- Table of contents v
- Introduction vii
- Dealing with postmodified possessors in early English 1
- Variation in the form and function of the possessive morpheme in Late Middle and Early Modern English 35
- The great regression 59
- Nominal categories and the expression of possession 89
- Expression of possession in English 123
- A cognitive analysis of John’s hat 149
- The oblique genitive in English 177
- The marker of the English “Group Genitive” is a special clitic, not an inflection 193
- Two prenominal possessors in West Flemish 219
- A Mozart sonata and the Palme murder 253
- Possessive clitics and ezafe in Urdu 291
- References 323
- Index 339
Chapters in this book
- Prelim pages i
- Table of contents v
- Introduction vii
- Dealing with postmodified possessors in early English 1
- Variation in the form and function of the possessive morpheme in Late Middle and Early Modern English 35
- The great regression 59
- Nominal categories and the expression of possession 89
- Expression of possession in English 123
- A cognitive analysis of John’s hat 149
- The oblique genitive in English 177
- The marker of the English “Group Genitive” is a special clitic, not an inflection 193
- Two prenominal possessors in West Flemish 219
- A Mozart sonata and the Palme murder 253
- Possessive clitics and ezafe in Urdu 291
- References 323
- Index 339
