Collective Nouns in English Used in Sweden a Corpus-Based Study on Number Concord with Collective Nouns
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
School of Language and Literature English Linguistics G3, Bachelor's Course Supervisor: Mikko Laitinen Course Code: 2EN10E Examiner: Christopher Allen Credits: 15 Date: 17 January 2014 Collective nouns in English used in Sweden A corpus-based study on number concord with collective nouns Petra Örlegård Abstract The purpose of this thesis is to investigate how Swedes writing in English construct number concord with collective nouns. This was done by studying three primary corpora: the Swedish English Newspaper Corpus (SWENC) and the press sections of Frown (American English) and F-LOB (British English). The findings were compared with the results in the Blogs in English by Swedes Corpus (BESC), Frown (American English) and F-LOB (British English). The SWENC contains texts from three online newspapers and one corporate newsletter in English, all of which are written by Swedes. The BESC contains texts from Swedes blogging in English. Frown and F-LOB contain texts from fifteen text genres in the 1990s. The results in the SWENC are discussed and compared with the press sections of F-LOB and Frown. The results are also compared with the BESC, Frown and F-LOB in order to see whether there is regional and stylistic variation. The results show that Swedes prefer singular verbal concord with collective nouns even though plural forms occur which seem to be closer to F-LOB Press (BrE) than Frown Press (AmE). In contrast, the SWENC differs from the press sections of Frown and F-LOB in constructing pronominal number. This difference could be influenced by Swedish usage which allows both singular and plural pronominal number with collective nouns. The study also shows that plural forms of political parties that seem to constitute collective units show variation in Sweden whereas such nouns take only plural concord in both American and British English. Keywords: agreement, American English, British English, collective nouns, concord, corpus, news genre, plurality, singularity, Sweden Petra Örlegård Table of contents 1 Introduction 1 2 Collective nouns and concord 3 2.1 Variation in number concord with collective nouns 3 2.2 Proper nouns that constitute collective nouns 5 2.3 Factors which affect agreement 6 2.4 Previous studies on agreement with collective nouns 9 3 Materials and methods 11 4 Results 14 4.1 Findings in the SWENC, F-LOB Press and Frown Press 14 4.2 Comparison of the news genre with the BESC, F-LOB and Frown 19 4.2.1 Comparison of the political parties with the plural forms of political parties 21 4.3 Discussion of the findings with previous findings 23 5 Conclusion 25 References 26 Appendix 28 Petra Örlegård 1 Introduction This thesis deals with collective nouns, more specifically with how Swedish journalists construct their choices of verbal and pronominal number with collective nouns. Collective nouns can be used with singular or plural agreement, as in illustrations (1) and (2). (1) In 2008 the couple were in trouble with the police. (Swedish Wire in the SWENC) (2) While Malmö resident Philipp Marra moved to Sweden about a decade ago simply because his partner got a job there, the couple has stayed on. (The Local in the SWENC) Arguably, in prescriptive grammar, a singular verb goes with a singular noun and a plural noun takes a plural verb. Collective nouns are, however, singular in form but plural in meaning as they denote “a group of people or animals or /…/ institutions” (Greenbaum, 1996:103). In fact, collective nouns can either constitute a group acting as a unit or a group acting as individuals. According to Collins Cobuild English Grammar (1990:37), a singular verb is used when the collective noun is thought of as a unit whereas the plural verb is used when the collective noun is thought of as a number of entities. Consequently, number concord varies. Leech, Deuchar and Hoogenraad (2006:190) discuss this problem of number concord with collective nouns. They argue that one needs to distinguish grammatical concord from notional concord. Grammatical concord refers to prescriptive grammar and syntactic agreement, i.e. verbal and pronominal agreement is based on the number of the noun. Notional concord, on the other hand, follows semantic agreement, i.e. variation in agreement with collective nouns that is based on the semantic meaning of the collective, e.g. whether it acts as a single unit or as a group of individuals (ibid). Levin (2001:159) discusses this in his doctoral dissertation and claims that there are a number of functional factors, e.g. syntactic, semantic and stylistic factors, behind the variable usage of number verbs with collective nouns. However, plural concord with collective nouns is “common enough in speech, but still tend to be frowned on in serious writing” (Leech et al, 2006:190). Therefore, Leech et al (2006) claim that singular concord is more frequent in writing than in speech. Concord with collective nouns is assumed to be problematic for both native and non- native speakers of English (Levin, 1998; Bauer, 1994:61fff). These problems are brought about by the fact that there is regional variation, e.g. American English (AmE) and British English (BrE) (Levin, 2001:60; Biber et al, 1999:19), and by the fact that there is variation 1 within the group of collective nouns, e.g. government has a political reference whereas family refers to a number of people within a family. Not only that, there is variation as regards to which pronoun is used when a singular verb co-occurs with a collective noun (Aremo, 2003), as in illustrations (3) and (4) below. (3) The family is not happy in their house. (Invented example) (4) The government has to make its decision on Sunday. (Invented example) Even if a singular verb is used in both examples, the pronoun number varies. In addition, collective nouns in AmE prefer to take singular verbs and pronouns, though plural pronouns are also possible, e.g. with couple (Quirk et al, 1985:759), whereas the selection is clearly different in BrE: both singular and plural verbs and pronouns are possible with collective nouns (Levin, 2001:160). Levin (2001:159) however observes that plural forms of pronouns are equally common in both AmE and BrE in spoken English. Based on the fact that there clearly is variation in number concord with collective nouns in English, e.g. regional differences, differences between spoken and written English and between nouns, the Swedish perspective thus makes an interesting study. This thesis will therefore investigate whether the frequencies of verbal and pronominal number with collective nouns in the Swedish corpus show variation. Furthermore, this thesis will explore which factors affect the concord with collective nouns. The aim of this study is to explore the choice of concord with collective nouns. This is done through a corpus study which examines if there is variation in usage and if Swedish journalists are consistent when choosing number verbs and pronouns with collective nouns. The findings from the corpus will be analysed in order to find out whether concord with collective nouns is based on various linguistic factors as explored in Levin (2001) or on grammatical concord, i.e. singular pronouns and verbs. Levin (2001:53) argues that there are stylistic factors that affect number agreement and it is assumed that different genres show stylistic differences. This thesis will thus compare the news genre with blog texts to see if there are stylistic differences that could have affected concord. Moreover, this thesis will look at whether there is variation based on which collective noun is involved. The collective nouns that will be analysed are presented in Table 1 on page 3 and are taken from earlier research as well as English grammar books. In addition to the list of collective nouns, proper nouns that constitute collectives will be looked into and they include the names of corporations and organizations like IKEA, BBC, the UN, SAAB, VOLVO and SAS. The names of political parties are also included. Investigating the abovementioned problems will include the following aspects: 2 1. Do Swedish journalists follow the American English variety, the British English one or a mixture of both in verbal and pronominal concord with collective nouns? 2. Which number concord occurs more frequently with collective nouns in texts written in English by Swedish journalists? 3. How consistent are Swedish journalists writing in English in selecting the number verb and pronoun with collective nouns? Table 1. List of collective nouns. Army Assembly Association Audience Board Class Club Commission Committee Community Company Congress Corporation Council Couple Crew Crowd Department Family Faculty Gang Government Group Jury Navy Majority Management Military Minority Office Organisation (z) Parliament Party Population Senate Society Staff Team The press The public The state In order to answer the abovementioned questions, this thesis will have the following structure: Section 2 provides a background on concord and discusses variation in number concord, proper nouns that constitute collective nouns and factors that affect variation in agreement. The changes of number agreement during the twentieth century and the tendencies of AmE and BrE will also be discussed here. Section 3 discusses the materials and methods used for this thesis. The results of the study are then presented and discussed in section 4 and finally, section 5 provides conclusions and suggestions to future studies. 2 Collective nouns and concord 2.1 Variation in number concord with collective nouns Many researchers observe that there is variation in agreement with collective nouns in English (Biber et al, 1999:20; Aremo, 2003; Levin, 2001:30). For instance, collective nouns are used with both singular and plural concord and this variation is more noticeable in BrE (Biber et al, 1999:188; Levin, 2001:37).