Effects of average and specific context probability on reduction of function words BE and HAVE

References

Akaike, Hirotogu. 1973. Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. In B. N. Petrov & F. Cáski (eds.), Second International Symposium on Information Theory 267–281. Akademiai Kaidó: Budapest.Search in Google Scholar

Alba, Matthew, C. 2008. Ratio frequency: Insights into usage effects on phonological structure from hiatus resolution in New Mexican Spanish. Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics 1(2). 247–286.10.1515/shll-2008-1020Search in Google Scholar

Arnon, Inbal & Uriel Cohen Priva. 2013. Time and again: The changing effect of word and multiword frequency and constituency on phonetic duration. Language and Speech 56(3). 349–371.10.1177/0023830913484891Search in Google Scholar

Aylett, Matthew & Alice Turk. 2006. Language redundancy predicts syllabic duration and the spectral characteristics of vocalic syllable nuclei. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 119. 3048–3058.10.1121/1.2188331Search in Google Scholar

Barth, Danielle. 2015. To BE and to HAVE: Function word production in child speech, child directed speech and inter-adult speech. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Barth, Danielle & Vsevolod Kapatsinski. 2017. A multimodel inference approach to categorical variant choice: Construction, priming and frequency effects on the choice between full and contracted forms of am, are and is. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 13(2). 1–58.10.1515/cllt-2014-0022Search in Google Scholar

Bartoń, Kamil. 2018. MuMIN: Multi-Model inference. R package version 1.40.4. CRAN.r-project.org/package=MuMIn.Search in Google Scholar

Bates, Douglas, Martin Maechler, Ben Bolker, & Steven Walker. 2015. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software 67(1). 1–48.10.18637/jss.v067.i01Search in Google Scholar

Bell, Alan, Daniel Jurafsky, Eric Fosler-Lussier, Cynthia Girand, Michelle L. Gregory & Daniel Gildea. 2003. Effects of disfluencies, predictability, and utterance position on word form variation in English conversation.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 113(2). 1001–1024.10.1121/1.1534836Search in Google Scholar

Bell, Alan, Jason M. Brenier, Michelle L. Gregory, Cynthia Girand & Daniel Jurafsky. 2009. Predictability effects on durations of content and function words in conversational English. Journal of Memory and Language 60(1). 92–111.10.1016/j.jml.2008.06.003Search in Google Scholar

Bresnan, Joan & Jessica Spencer. 2016. Frequency effects in spoken syntax: ‘Have’ and ‘be’ contraction. In Stefan Grondelaers & Roeland van Hout (eds.), New ways of analysing syntactic variation, Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Search in Google Scholar

Burnham, Kenneth P. & David R. Anderson. 2002. Model selection and multimodel inference: A practical Information-Theoretic approach, 2nd edition. New York: Springer.Search in Google Scholar

Bybee, Joan. 2001. Phonology and language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511612886Search in Google Scholar

Bybee, Joan. 2002. Word frequency and context of use in the lexical diffusion of phonetically conditioned sound change. Language Variation and Change 14. 261–290.10.1017/S0954394502143018Search in Google Scholar

Bybee, Joan. 2007. Frequency of use and the organization of language. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195301571.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Bybee, Joan, & William Pagliuca. 1985. Cross-linguistic comparison and the development of grammatical meaning. In Jacek Fisiak (ed.), Historical semantics, historical word formation, 59–83. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110850178.59Search in Google Scholar

Bybee, Joan, Revere Dale Perkins & William Pagliuca. 1994. The evolution of grammar: Tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Byrd, Dani. 1994. Relations of sex and dialect to reduction. Speech Communication 15(1). 39–54.10.1016/0167-6393(94)90039-6Search in Google Scholar

Cohen Priva, Uriel. 2008. Using information content to predict phone deletion. In Proceedings of the 27th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, 90–98.Search in Google Scholar

Cohen Priva, Uriel. 2012. Sign and signal: Deriving linguistic generalizations from information utility. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Cohen Priva, Uriel & T. Floriean Jaeger. 2018. The interdependence of frequency, predictability, and informativity in the segmental domain. Linguistics Vanguard 4(s2). doi:10.1515/lingvan-2017-0028 (accessed 24 Sep 2018).Search in Google Scholar

Davies, Mark. 2008-. The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA): 400+ million words, 1990-present. Available online at http://www.americancorpus.org.Search in Google Scholar

Diewald, Gabriele. 2002. A model for relevant types of contexts in grammaticalization. Typological Studies in Language 49. 103–120.10.1075/tsl.49.09dieSearch in Google Scholar

Fedorenko, Evelina, Edward Gibson & Douglas Rhode. 2006. The nature of working memory capacity in sentence comprehension: Evidence against domain-specific working memory resources. Journal of Memory and Language 55. 541–553.10.1016/j.jml.2005.12.006Search in Google Scholar

Ferreira, Victor S. 2008. Ambiguity, accessibility, and a division of labor for communicative success. In Brian H. Ross (ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation 210–246. Amsterdam: Elsevier.10.1016/S0079-7421(08)00006-6Search in Google Scholar

Fowler, Carol A. & Jonathan Housum. 1987. Talkers’ signaling of “new” and “old” words in speech and listeners’ perception and use of the distinction. Journal of Memory and Language 26. 489–504.10.1016/0749-596X(87)90136-7Search in Google Scholar

Frank, Austin F. & T. Florian Jaeger. 2008. Speaking rationally: Uniform information density as an optimal strategy for language production. In Brad C. Love, Ken McRae & Vladimir M. Sloutsky (eds.), Proceedings of the 30^thAnnual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 939–944. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.Search in Google Scholar

Gabelentz, Georg von der. 1891. Die Sprachwissenschaft, ihre Aufgaben, Methoden und bisherigen Ergebnisse. Leipzig: T. O. Weigel.Search in Google Scholar

Galati, Alexia & Susan E. Brennan. 2010. Attenuating information in spoken communication: For the speaker, or for the addressee? Journal of Memory and Language 62(1). 35–51.10.1016/j.jml.2009.09.002Search in Google Scholar

Gahl, Susanne. 2008. “Time” and “thyme” are not homophones: Word durations in spontaneous speech. Language 84. 474–496.10.1353/lan.0.0035Search in Google Scholar

Gahl, Susanne & Susan Marie Garnsey. 2004. Knowledge of grammar, knowledge of usage: Syntactic probabilities affect pronunciation variation. Language 80(4). 748–775.10.1353/lan.2004.0185Search in Google Scholar

Gahl, Susanne, Yao Yao & Keith Johnson. 2012. Why reduce? Phonological neighborhood density and phonetic reduction in spontaneous speech. Journal of Memory and Language 66. 789–806.10.1016/j.jml.2011.11.006Search in Google Scholar

Givón, Talmy. 1985. Iconicity, isomorphism and non-arbitrary coding in syntax. In John Haiman (ed.), Iconicity in syntax, 187–219. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.6.10givSearch in Google Scholar

Gregory, Michelle L., William D. Raymond, Alan Bell, Eric Fosler-Lussier & Daniel Jurafsky. 1999. The effects of collocational strength and contextual predictability in lexical production. Chicago Linguistic Society 35. 151–166.Search in Google Scholar

Hall, Kathleen Currie, Elizabeth Hume, T. Florian Jaeger & Andrew Wedel. 2018. The role of predictability in shaping phonological patterns. Linguistics Vanguard 4(s2). doi:10.1515/lingvan-2017-0027 (accessed 24 Sep 2018).Search in Google Scholar

Heine, Bernd. 1993. Auxiliaries. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780195083873.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Heine, Bernd. 2003. Grammaticalization. In Brian D. Joseph & Richard D. Janda (eds.), The Handbook of Historical Linguistics, 575–601. Oxford: Blackwell.10.1111/b.9781405127479.2004.00020.xSearch in Google Scholar

Hopper, Paul J., & Elizabeth Closs Traugott. 1993. Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Jaeger, T. Florian & Esteban Buz. 2016. Signal reduction and linguistic encoding. Handbook of psycholinguistics. Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781118829516.ch3Search in Google Scholar

Jaeger, T. Florian & Harry Tily. 2010. On language ‘utility’: Processing complexity and communicative efficiency. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science 2(3). 323–335.10.1002/wcs.126Search in Google Scholar

Jurafsky, Daniel, Alan Bell, Michelle L. Gregory & William D. Raymond. 2001. Probabilistic relations between words: Evidence from reduction in lexical production. In Joan Bybee, and Paul J. Hopper. (eds.), Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure, 229–254. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.45.13jurSearch in Google Scholar

Krug, Manfred. 1998. String frequency: A cognitive motivating factor in coalescence, language processing, and linguistic change. Journal of English Linguistics 26. 286–320.10.1177/007542429802600402Search in Google Scholar

Kuperman, Victor & Joan Bresnan. 2012. The effects of construction probability on word durations during spontaneous incremental sentence production. Journal of Memory and Language 66. 588–611.10.1016/j.jml.2012.04.003Search in Google Scholar

Kuznetsova, Alexandra, Per Bruun Brockhoff & Rune Hauo Bojesen Christensen. 2016. lmerTest: Tests in linear mixed effects models. R package version 2.0-33. CRAN.r-project.org/package=lmerTest.10.18637/jss.v082.i13Search in Google Scholar

Lehmann, Christian. 1995. Thoughts on grammaticalization. München: Lincom Europa.Search in Google Scholar

Levelt, Willem J. M., Ardi Roelofs & Antje S. Meyer. 1999. A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22. 1–75.10.3115/992628.992631Search in Google Scholar

Lindblom, Björn. 1990. Explaining phonetic variation: A sketch of the H&H theory. In William J. Hardcastle & Alain Marchal (eds.), Speech production and speech modelling, 403–439. Dordrecht: Kluwer.10.1007/978-94-009-2037-8_16Search in Google Scholar

Lindblom, Björn, Susan Guion, Susan Hura, Seung-Jae Moon, & Raquel Willerman. 1995. Is sound change adaptive? Rivista di linguistica 7. 5–36.Search in Google Scholar

Piantadosi, Steven T., Harry Tily, & Edward Gibson. 2011. Word lengths are optimized for efficient communication. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 108(9). 3526–3529.10.1073/pnas.1012551108Search in Google Scholar

Pierrehumbert, Janet. 2001. Exemplar dynamics: Word frequency, lenition, and contrast. In Joan Bybee & Paul J. Hopper. (eds.), Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure, 137–157. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.45.08pieSearch in Google Scholar

Pierrehumbert, Janet. 2002. Word-specific phonetics. In Carlos Gussenhoven & Natasha Warner (eds.), Laboratory phonology VII (phonology and phonetics), 101–140. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110197105.1.101Search in Google Scholar

Pitt, Mark A., Laura Dilley, Keith Johnson, Scott Kiesling, William Raymond, Elizabeth Hume & Eric Fosler-Lussier. 2007. Buckeye Corpus of Conversational Speech (2nd release) [www.buckeyecorpus.osu.edu] Columbus, OH: Department of Psychology, Ohio State University (Distributor).Search in Google Scholar

Pluymaekers, Mark, Mirjam Ernestus & Harald R. Baayen. 2005. Articulatory planning is continuous and sensitive to informational redundancy. Phonetica 62(2–4). 146–159.10.1159/000090095Search in Google Scholar

R Core Team. 2017. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. www.R-project.org.Search in Google Scholar

Raymond, William D. & Esther L. Brown. 2012. Are effects of word frequency effects of context of use? An analysis of initial fricative reduction in Spanish. In Stefan Th. Gries & Dagmar Divjak (eds.), Frequency effects in language learning and processing, 35–52. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110274059.35Search in Google Scholar

Seyfarth, Scott. 2014. Word informativity influences acoustic duration: Effects of contextual predictability on lexical representation. Cognition 133. 140–155.10.1016/j.cognition.2014.06.013Search in Google Scholar

Torres Cacoullos, Rena. 1999. Construction frequency and reductive change: Diachronic and register variation in Spanish clitic climbing. Language Variation and Change 11(2). 143–170.10.1017/S095439459911202XSearch in Google Scholar

Torres Cacoullos, Rena & James A. Walker. 2011. Collocations in grammaticalization and variation. In Bernd Heine & Heiko Narrog (eds.) The Oxford handbook of grammaticalization, 225–238. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199586783.013.0018Search in Google Scholar

Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2003. Constructions in grammaticalization. In Brian D. Joseph & Richard D. Janda (eds.), The handbook of historical linguistics, 624–647. Oxford: Blackwell.10.1002/9780470756393.ch20Search in Google Scholar

Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2011. Grammaticalization and mechanisms of change. In Bernd Heine & Heiko Narrog, (eds.), The Oxford handbook of grammaticalization, 19–31. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199586783.013.0002Search in Google Scholar

Ullman, Michael T. 2001. A neurocognitive perspective on language: The declarative/procedural model. Neuroscience 2. 717–727.10.1038/35094573Search in Google Scholar

van Bergem, Dick R. 1995. Acoustic and lexical vowel reduction. Amsterdam: IFOTT.Search in Google Scholar

van Son, Rob. J. J. H. and Louis C. W. Pols. 2003. Information structure and efficiency in speech production. Paper presented at the 8^th European Conference on Speech Communication and Technology (Eurospeech 2003) Geneva, Switzerland, 1–4 September.10.21437/Eurospeech.2003-63Search in Google Scholar

Wedel, Andrew B. 2006. Exemplar models, evolution and language change. The Linguistic Review 23. 247–274.10.1515/TLR.2006.010Search in Google Scholar

Wedel, Andrew. 2012. Lexical contrast maintenance and the development of sublexical contrast systems. Language and Cognition 4. 319–355.10.1515/langcog-2012-0018Search in Google Scholar