The Wicked Which Hunt: The Decline of Which-Relatives in 20th Century American English
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Unlike non-restrictive relative clauses, which have long given sole sovereignty to wh-forms, restrictive relative clauses are open to variation between wh-forms, that, and zero. In Present-Day American English, however, restrictive relatives clauses with which have shown a steep decline in usage. The present study aims to shed light on this downward trend of which-relatives by conducting a corpus-based quantitative and qualitative analysis. In an attempt to place the change in the overall evolutionary development of 20th century American English, it is argued with Leech et al. (2009) that which, being the more formal and less colloquial variant, has given way to that (and presumably zero) under the pressures of a larger, prevalent trend of colloquialization. It is further postulated that colloquialization in this case is reinforced by forces of prescriptivism. Though several potential parameters for the distribution of which-relatives are proposed on the basis of the notion of syntactic complexity, the results obtained from the statistical analysis do not offer conclusive evidence of the correlation between the use of which and syntactic complexity. This points to a need for further examination of the phenomenon at hand, perhaps this time from the view of discourse and/or stylistics.
Abstract
Unlike non-restrictive relative clauses, which have long given sole sovereignty to wh-forms, restrictive relative clauses are open to variation between wh-forms, that, and zero. In Present-Day American English, however, restrictive relatives clauses with which have shown a steep decline in usage. The present study aims to shed light on this downward trend of which-relatives by conducting a corpus-based quantitative and qualitative analysis. In an attempt to place the change in the overall evolutionary development of 20th century American English, it is argued with Leech et al. (2009) that which, being the more formal and less colloquial variant, has given way to that (and presumably zero) under the pressures of a larger, prevalent trend of colloquialization. It is further postulated that colloquialization in this case is reinforced by forces of prescriptivism. Though several potential parameters for the distribution of which-relatives are proposed on the basis of the notion of syntactic complexity, the results obtained from the statistical analysis do not offer conclusive evidence of the correlation between the use of which and syntactic complexity. This points to a need for further examination of the phenomenon at hand, perhaps this time from the view of discourse and/or stylistics.
참고문헌 (37)
- Auer, A, "Precept and Practice: The Influence of Prescriptivism on the English Subjunctive, In Syntax, Style and Grammatical Norms: English from 1500-2000", pp.33~54 (2006), Peter Lang
- Ball, C. N, "Automated Text Analysis: Cautionary Tales", Literary and Linguistic Computing, 9, pp.295~302 (1994)
- Ball, C. N, "A Diachronic Study of Relative Markers in Spoken and Written English", Language Variation and Change, 8, pp.227~258 (1996)
- Biber, D, "Variation across Speech and Writing" (1988), Cambridge University Press
- Biber, D, "The Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English" (1999), Longman
- Biesenbach-Lucas, S, "The Use of Relative Markers in Modern American English, In Variation in Language: NWAV-XV at Stanford", pp.13~21 (1987), Dept. of Linguistics, Stanford University
- Bohmann, A, "Sacred That and Wicked Which: Prescriptivism and Change in the Use of English Relativizers", Texas Linguistics Forum, 54, pp.88~101 (2011)
- Busse, U, "Problem Areas of English Grammar between Usage, Norm, and Variation, In Grammar between Norm and Variation", pp.87~102 (2010), Peter Lang
- Chomsky, N, "On the Notion "Rule of Grammar", Proceedings of the Twelfth Symposium in Applied Mathematics, pp.6~24 (1961), American Mathematical Society
- Dekeyser, X, "Relativizers in Early Modern English: A Dynamic Quantitative Study, In Historical Syntax", pp.61~87 (1984), Mouton
- Díaz Pérez, F. J, "Relative Connectives in Present-Day English: A Corpus-Based Analysis", Miscelánea: A Journal of English and American Studies, 18 (1997)
- Facchinetti, R, "The Modal Verb 'Shall' between Grammar and Usage in the Nineteenth Century, In The History of English in a Social Context: A Contribution to Historical Sociolinguistics", pp.115~134 (2000), Mouton de Gruyter
- Fowler, H. W, "The King’s English" (1908), Clarendon Press
- Guy, G. R, "On the Choice of Relative Pronouns in English", American Speech, 70, pp.148~162 (1995)
- Hundt, M, "Retrieving Relatives from Historical Data", Literary and Linguistic Computing, 27, pp.3~16 (2012)
- Jespersen, O, "A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles, In Part III: Syntax, Second Volume" (1927), Carl Winters Universitätsbuchhandlung
- Keenan, E, "Noun Phrase Accessibility and Universal Grammar", Linguistic Inquiry, 8, pp.63~99 (1977)
- Kikai, A, "The Influence of Syntactic Position on Relativization Strategies, In Variation in Language: NWAV-XV at Stanford", pp.266~277 (1987), Dept. of Linguistics, Stanford University
- Kuno, S, "The Position of Relative Clauses and Conjunctions", Linguistic Inquiry, 5, pp.117~136 (1974)
- Leech, G, "Change in Contemporary English: A Grammatical Study" (2009), Cambridge UP
- Mager, N. H, "Prentice Hall Encyclopedic Dictionary of English Usage" (1994), Prentice Hall
- 문지순, "Observations and Remarks on Relative Pronoun Variation in English", 언어연구, 29(2), pp.281~297 (2012), 언어정보연구소
- Mustanoja, T. F, "A Middle English Syntax, In Part I: Parts of Speech. (Mémoires de la Société Néophilologique de Helsinki 23.)" (1960), Société Néophilologique
- Olofsson, A, "Relative Junctions in Written American English" (1981), Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis
- Peters, P, "English Grammar and the Lexicography of Usage", Journal of English Linguistics, 25, pp.315~331 (1997)
- Prideaux, G. D, "Strategies and Structure: The Processing of Relative Clauses" (1986), Benjamins
- Quirk, R, "Relative Clauses in Educated Spoken English", English Studies, 38, pp.97~109 (1957)
- Rissanen, M, "The Choice of Relative Pronouns in 17th Century American English, In Historical Syntax", pp.417~435 (1984), Mouton
- Rissanen, M, "The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol. 3: 1476-1776", pp.187~331 (1999), Cambridge UP
- Romaine, S, "Socio-Historical Linguistics: Its Status and Methodolgy" (1982), Cambridge University Press
- Rydén, M, "Relative Constructions in Early 16th Century American English" (1966), Uppsala
- Safire, W, "Take My Word for It" (1986), Times Books
- Siegal, A. M, "The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage" (1999), Random House
- Strunk, W, "The Elements of Style" (1999), Longman
- Temperley, D, "Ambiguity Avoidance in English Relative Clauses", Language, 79, pp.464~484 (2003)
- Traugott, E. C, "The History of English Syntax" (1972), Hold, Rinehart and Winston