The alternative negative constructions in spoken and written Korean: Logistic regression analysis
-
Beom-mo Kang
Abstract
Adopting quantitative corpus-based methods, this paper focuses on the alternative negative constructions in Korean, [an V] and [V anhda]. Logistic regression analyses for a mixed-effects model were carried out on data drawn from the Sejong Korean Corpus. Certain features of the verb or adjective in negative constructions significantly affect the use of the two negative constructions. A relevant factor is register/medium (spoken or written), among other significant interactions of factors. Furthermore, the fact that frequency is consistent with other relevant factors, together with certain diachronic facts of Korean, supports the claim that frequency of use plays an important role in linguistic changes. Another finding is that, notwithstanding noticeable differences between spoken and written language, the factors influencing the use of the two negative constructions in Korean are largely similar in the spoken and written registers.
Acknowledgments
Many people read previous versions of this paper and kindly offered a range of suggestions. In particular, I thank the CLLT editors and reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions as to the content as well as the style of the paper. I also thank Hyunsook for all her help.
References
Arppe, Antii, Gaëtanelle Gilquin, Dylan Glynn, Martin Hilpert & Arne Zeschel. 2010. Cognitive corpus linguistics: Five points of debate on current theory and methodology. Corpora 5(1). 1–27.10.3366/cor.2010.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Baayen, R. Harald 2008. Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511801686Suche in Google Scholar
Barlow, Michael & Susan Kemmer (eds.). 2000. Usage based models of language. Stanford: CSLI.Suche in Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas. 1988. Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511621024Suche in Google Scholar
Biber, Doublas. 2012. Register as a predictor of linguistic variation. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 8(1). 9–37.10.1515/cllt-2012-0002Suche in Google Scholar
Brazil, David. 1995. A grammar of speech. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Bresnan, Joan, Anna Cueni, Tatiana Nikitina & R. Harald Baayen. 2007. Predicting the dative alternation. In G. Bouman, I. Kraemer & J. Zwarts (eds.), Cognitive foundations of interpretation, 69–94. Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Science.Suche in Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan. 2007. Diachronic linguistics. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics, 945–987. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan & Clay Beckner. 2010. Usage-based theory. In Bernd Heine & Heiko Narrog (eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis, 826–855. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199544004.013.0032Suche in Google Scholar
Croft, William & D. Alan Cruse. 2004. Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511803864Suche in Google Scholar
Dąrbrowska, Ewa & Divjak Divjak (eds.). 2015. Handbook of cognitive linguistics. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110292022Suche in Google Scholar
Geeraerts, Dirk & Hubert Cuyckens (eds.). 2007. The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Glynn, Dylan & Kerstin Fischer (eds.). 2010. Quantitative methods in cognitive semantics: Corpus-driven approaches. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110226423Suche in Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E. 2006. Constructions at work: The nature of generalizations in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199268511.003.0002Suche in Google Scholar
Gries, Stefan, Th. 2012. Corpus linguistics, theoretical linguistics, and cognitive/psycholinguistics: Towards more and more fruitful exchange. In J. Mukherjee & M. Hurber (eds.), Corpus linguistics and variation in English: Theory and description, 41–63. Amsterdam: Rodopy.10.1163/9789401207713_006Suche in Google Scholar
Grondelaers, Stefan, Dirk Speelman & Dirk Geeraerts. 2007. Lexical variation and change. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (eds), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics, 988–1011. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Hilpert, Martin. 2015. Historical linguistics. In E. Dąrbrowska & D. Divjak (eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics, 346–366. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110292022-017Suche in Google Scholar
Janda, Laura A. (ed.). 2013. Cognitive linguistics: The quantitative turn. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110335255Suche in Google Scholar
Johnson, Keith. 2008. Quantitative methods in linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Suche in Google Scholar
Kang, Beom-mo. 2001. The grammar and use of Korean reflexives. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 6(1). 134–150.10.1075/ijcl.6.1.06kanSuche in Google Scholar
Kang, Beom-mo. 2014. A statistical analysis of the restrictions on combining the negative element an and verbs/adjectives in written Korean. Eoneo (Language) 39(1). 1–25. [written in Korean]10.18855/lisoko.2014.39.1.001Suche in Google Scholar
Kang, Beom-mo, Heung-gyu Kim, & Myung-Hoe Huh. 1998. Analysis of Korean text types and styles based on statistical methods. Eeoneohag (Linguistics) 22. 3–57. [written in Korean]Suche in Google Scholar
Kim, Hung-gyu, Beom-mo Kang & Jungha Hong. 2007. The 21st century Sejong Corpora (to be) completed. Korean Language in America 12. 31–42.Suche in Google Scholar
Kim, Young-joo. 1997. The acquisition of Korean. In Dan Isaac Slobin (ed.). The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition, vol. 4, 335–444. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbum Associates.Suche in Google Scholar
Koh, Young-geun. 2010. Middle Korean grammar, 3rd edn. Seoul: Jibmundang. [written in Korean]Suche in Google Scholar
Koh, Young-geun & Bon-gwan Kuh. 2008. Korean grammar. Seoul: Jipmumdang. [written in Korean]Suche in Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 1987. Foundations of cognitive grammar, vol. 1: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Lee, Ji-young. 2004. Formation of the negative adverb an and the negative verb anhda. Eomunnonjib (Papers in Linguistics and Literature) 32(3). 165–186. [written in Korean]Suche in Google Scholar
Lüdeling, Anke & Merja Kytö (eds.). 2009. Corpus linguistics: An international handbook, vol. 2. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110213881.2Suche in Google Scholar
Montague, Richard. 1974. Formal philosophy: Selected papers of Richard Montague, ed. by R. Thomason. New Haven: Yale University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Mun, Sun-deok. 1998. Short negative constructions in Jeju dialects. Eoneohag Yeongu (Studies in Linguistics) 3. 65–80. [written in Korean]Suche in Google Scholar
Oh, Seon-hwa. 2007. Negative elements in Yenben dialects. Eomun Yeongu (Studies in Linguistics and Literature) 55. 31–50. [written in Korean]Suche in Google Scholar
Park, Heeheon. 1988. Acquisition of negation in Korean. Korean Linguistics 9. 111–131.10.1075/kl.9.04hpSuche in Google Scholar
Park, Sang-su. 2011. A diachronic analysis of negative elements in Korean ani and aniha. Eoneogwahag Yoengu (Language Science) 58. 71–92. [written in Korean]Suche in Google Scholar
R Development Core Team. 2015. online. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing, v. 3.2. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org.Suche in Google Scholar
Schilk, Marco, Joybrato Mukherjee, Christopher Nam & Sach Mukherjee. 2013. Complementation of ditransitive verbs in South Asian Englishes: A multifactorial analysis. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 9(2). 187–225.10.1515/cllt-2013-0001Suche in Google Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg. 2007. Entrenchment, salience, and basic levels. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics, 117–138. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Seo, Jeong–su. 1996. Korean grammar, 2nd edn. Seoul: Hanyang University Press. [written in Korean]Suche in Google Scholar
Speelman, Dirk. 2014. Logistic regression: A confirmatory technique for comparisons in Corpus Linguistics. In D. Glynn & J.A. Robinson (eds.), Corpus methods for semantics: Quantitative studies in polysemy and synonymy, 487–533. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/hcp.43.18speSuche in Google Scholar
Tottie, Gunnel. 1991. Lexical diffusion in syntactic change: Frequency as a determinant of linguistic conservatism in the development of negation in English. In Dieter Kastovsky (ed.), Historical English syntax, 439–467. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Suche in Google Scholar
Tummers, Jose, Kris Heylen & Dirk Geeraerts. 2005. Usage–based approaches in cognitive linguistics: A technical state of the art. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 1(2). 225–261.10.1515/cllt.2005.1.2.225Suche in Google Scholar
©2019 by De Gruyter Mouton
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- How to identify moral language in presidential speeches: A comparison between a social-psychological and a cognitive-linguistic approach to corpus analysis
- Grammatical construction of function words between old and modern written Arabic: A corpus-based analysis
- Definite article bridging relations in L2: A learner corpus study
- Against statistical significance testing in corpus linguistics
- How do English translations differ from non-translated English writings? A multi-feature statistical model for linguistic variation analysis
- Prototype-driven alternations: The case of German weak nouns
- The alternative negative constructions in spoken and written Korean: Logistic regression analysis
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- How to identify moral language in presidential speeches: A comparison between a social-psychological and a cognitive-linguistic approach to corpus analysis
- Grammatical construction of function words between old and modern written Arabic: A corpus-based analysis
- Definite article bridging relations in L2: A learner corpus study
- Against statistical significance testing in corpus linguistics
- How do English translations differ from non-translated English writings? A multi-feature statistical model for linguistic variation analysis
- Prototype-driven alternations: The case of German weak nouns
- The alternative negative constructions in spoken and written Korean: Logistic regression analysis
