When variables align: A Bayesian multinomial mixed-effects model of English permissive constructions

Abstract This paper is a quantitative multifactorial study of the near-synonymous constructions let+V, allow+to V and permit+to V based on the British National Corpus. The study investigates the differences between these constructions with the help of 23 formal, semantic, social and collostructional variables. A Bayesian multinomial mixed-effects model reveals a remarkable alignment of the variables that represent different dimensions of variation, namely, the linguistic distance between the predicates, the conceptual distance between the events they represent, the distance between the speaker and the Permitter and Permittee on the animacy/entrenchment/empathy hierarchy, the social and communicative distance between the interlocutors, as well as the strength of collostructional attraction between the constructions and second verb slot fillers. The paper offers several possible explanations for this alignment from a cognitive, functional and historical perspective.

[1]  R. Harald Baayen,et al.  Models, forests, and trees of York English: Was/were variation as a case study for statistical practice , 2012, Language Variation and Change.

[2]  Scott Delancey,et al.  An Interpretation of Split Ergativity and Related Patterns , 1981 .

[3]  George Kingsley Zipf,et al.  Human behavior and the principle of least effort , 1949 .

[4]  M. Silverstein.  7. Hierarchy of Features and Ergativity , 1986 .

[5]  W. Bruce Croft.  On iconicity of distance , 2008 .

[6]  Olga Fischer,et al.  On analogy as the motivation for grammaticalization , 2008 .

[7]  Dan Klein,et al.  Accurate Unlexicalized Parsing , 2003, ACL.

[8]  G. Rohdenburg.  Cognitive complexity and increased grammatical explicitness in English , 1996 .

[9]  Olga Fischer,et al.  The distinction between 'to' and bare infinitival complements in late Middle English , 1995 .

[10]  Stefan Thomas Gries,et al.  Multifactorial Analysis in Corpus Linguistics: A Study of Particle Placement , 2003 .

[11]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[12]  Aki Vehtari,et al.  Efficient implementation of leave-one-out cross-validation and WAIC for evaluating fitted Bayesian models , 2015 .

[13]  Shravan Vasishth,et al.  Bayesian linear mixed models using Stan: A tutorial for psychologists, linguists, and cognitive scientists , 2015, 1506.06201.

[14]  Pedersen Rebecca,et al.  What to Infer from a DescriptionTed , 1996 .

[15]  Sonia Cristofaro,et al.  Cognitive explanations, distributional evidence, and diachrony , 2012 .

[16]  Simone Schweitzer.  Non Finite Complementation A Usage Based Study Of Infinitive And Ing Clauses In English , 2016 .

[17]  Olga Fischer,et al.  Syntactic change and borrowing: the case of the accusative-and-infinitive construction in English , 1992 .

[18]  Christian Mair,et al.  Twentieth-Century English: History, Variation and Standardization , 2006 .

[19]  S. Vasishth,et al.  Processing Chinese Relative Clauses: Evidence for the Subject-Relative Advantage , 2013, PloS one.

[20]  Hans-Jörg Schmid,et al.  Reply to “More (old and new) misunderstandings of collostructional analysis: On Schmid & Küchenhoff” by Stefan Th. Gries , 2015 .

[21]  Daniel Wiechmann.  On the computation of collostruction strength: Testing measures of association as expressions of lexical bias , 2008 .

[22]  John Haiman,et al.  Iconic and Economic Motivation , 1983 .

[23]  D. Adger,et al.  Syntax , 2014, Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science.

[24]  Stefan Th. Gries,et al.  More (old and new) misunderstandings of collostructional analysis: On Schmid and Küchenhoff (2013) , 2015 .

[25]  W. Bruce Croft,et al.  Toward a social cognitive linguistics , 2009 .

[26]  SUZANNE KEMMER,et al.  The grammar of causatives and the conceptual structure of events , 1994 .

[27]  Hans-Jörg Schmid,et al.  Lexico-grammatical patterns, pragmatic associations and discourse frequency , 2014 .

[28]  S. Gries,et al.  Covarying collexemes , 2005 .

[29]  Stefan Th. Gries,et al.  Spanish "lo(s)-le(s)" Clitic Alternations in Psych Verbs: A Multifactorial Corpus-Based Analysis , 2013 .

[30]  Beth Levin,et al.  English Verb Classes and Alternations: A Preliminary Investigation , 1993 .

[31]  Patrick Duffley,et al.  The English infinitive , 1993 .

[32]  P. Hewson.  Bayesian Data Analysis 3rd edn A. Gelman, J. B. Carlin, H. S. Stern, D. B. Dunson, A. Vehtari and D. B. Rubin, 2013 Boca Raton, Chapman and Hall–CRC 676 pp., £44.99 ISBN 1‐439‐84095‐4 , 2015 .

[33]  L. Allan.  A note on measurement of contingency between two binary variables in judgment tasks , 1980 .

[34]  Ran R. Hassin,et al.  Can Consumers Make Affordable Care Affordable? The Value of Choice Architecture , 2013, PloS one.

[35]  Kris Heylen.  A quantitative corpus study of German word order variation , 2004 .

[36]  N. Ellis.  Language Acquisition as Rational Contingency Learning , 2006 .

[37]  Anna Wierzbicka,et al.  English: Meaning and Culture , 2006 .

[38]  L. Talmy.  Toward a Cognitive Semantics , 2003 .

[39]  J. Kruschke.  Doing Bayesian Data Analysis: A Tutorial with R and BUGS , 2010 .

[40]  Jan Svartvik,et al.  A Communicative Grammar of English , 1975 .

[41]  M. Haspelmath,et al.  Frequency vs. iconicity in explaining grammatical asymmetries , 2008 .

[42]  Paul D. Deane,et al.  Grammar in Mind and Brain , 1993 .

[43]  Bettelou Los,et al.  The Rise of the To-Infinitive , 2005 .

[44]  Hans-Jörg Schmid,et al.  English Abstract Nouns as Conceptual Shells , 2001, English and American Studies in German.

[45]  Anita Mittwoch,et al.  On the distribution of bare infinitive complements in English , 1990, Journal of Linguistics.

[46]  Talmy Givón,et al.  The Binding Hierarchy and the Typology of Complements , 1980 .

[47]  Stefan Th. Gries,et al.  Frequencies, probabilities, and association measures in usage-/exemplar-based linguistics: Some necessary clarifications , 2012 .

[48]  Natalia Levshina,et al.  How to do Linguistics with R: Data exploration and statistical analysis , 2015 .

[49]  Joan L. Bybee.  Cognitive Processes in Grammaticalization , 2014 .

[50]  Martin Haspelmath,et al.  Coding causal–noncausal verb alternations: A form–frequency correspondence explanation1 , 2014, Journal of Linguistics.

[51]  Hans-Jörg Schmid,et al.  Collostructional analysis and other ways of measuring lexicogrammatical attraction: Theoretical premises, practical problems and cognitive underpinnings , 2013 .

[52]  Stefan Th. Gries,et al.  Collostructions: Investigating the interaction of words and constructions , 2003 .