DOCSLIB.ORG

Personal Pronouns in the Dialects of England

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Personal Pronouns in the Dialects of England A Corpus Study of Grammatical Variation in Spontaneous Speech Inaugural-Dissertation zur Erlangung der Doktorwürde der Philologischen Fakultät der Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg im Breisgau vorgelegt von Nuria Hernández y Siebold aus Kehl am Rhein Sommersemester 2010 Ursprünglicher Titel: Personal Pronouns in the Dialects of England – A Corpus-Driven Study of Grammatical Variation in Spontaneous Speech Erstgutachter: Prof. Dr. Bernd Kortmann Zweitgutachter: Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Christian Mair Drittgutachter: Prof. Dr. Guido Seiler Vorsitzender des Promotionsausschusses der Gemeinsamen Kommission der Philologischen, Philosophischen und Wirtschafts- und Verhaltenswissenschaftlichen Fakultät: Prof. Dr. Hans-Helmuth Gander Datum der Disputation: 14. März 2011 Contents List of tables vi List of figures vii List of maps viii Abbreviations ix Acknowledgements xi I Background 1 Contents and definitions . 1 1.1 Approach and objectives. 1 1.2 Grammatical categorisation and terminology . 7 1.3 Structure of the study . 11 2 Spoken-language research . 13 2.1 Preserving data of speech . 13 2.2 Transcribing data of speech . 14 3 Pronoun variation in the history of English . 17 3.1 Some historical facts . 18 3.1.1 Old English (450–1150 AD) . 18 3.1.2 Middle English (1150–1470 AD) . 23 3.1.3 Early Modern English to Modern English (after 1470) . 26 3.2 Standard English and the ideology of Standard English . 30 3.2.1 Desire for (linguistic) order . 30 3.2.2 Appreciation of linguistic diversity . 33 3.3 The standard Modern English paradigm. 34 II Empirical study 4 Data and methodology . 39 4.1 The Freiburg Corpus of English Dialects (FRED) . 39 4.1.1 Corpus design . 39 4.1.2 Subcorpus size and area coverage . 42 4.1.3 Speakers . 45 4.1.4 Recordings and transcripts . 46 4.2 Data extraction, coding and statistics. 49 4.3 CD-ROM . 55 i 5 Preliminary remarks . 57 5.1 The functional versatility of S-, O- and self-forms in the corpus . 57 5.2 Speaker distribution patterns . 59 5.2.1 Rare features . 60 5.2.2 Speaker-specific features . 60 5.2.3 Generalised features . 61 6 Number and person features . 63 6.1 Plural forms with singular reference . 64 6.1.1 Singular us . 64 6.1.2 Third person plural forms with singular referent NPs . 65 6.1.3 Areal distribution . 68 6.2 Dummy objects: why not walk it? . 68 6.3 Existential it . 71 6.4 Generic question tags – innit? . 73 6.5 Summary . 77 7 Gendered pronouns . 79 7.1 Gendered pronouns in the literature . 80 7.2 Gendered pronouns in FRED . 81 7.2.1 Quantitative distribution . 82 7.2.2 Referent categories, topicality, and the speaker viewpoint . 84 7.2.3 Graphic representation on the Animacy Hierarchy . 91 7.2.4 Switches between gendered and non-gendered forms . 92 7.2.5 In-text distribution: semantic priming and semantic differentiation . 93 7.2.6 Syntactic positions . 94 7.2.7 Gendered pronouns and speaker sex . 95 7.2.8 Areal distribution . 97 7.3 Summary . 99 8 Pronoun exchange . 101 8.1 Traditional definition . 101 8.2 Subject forms in object function . 103 8.2.1 Object and prepositional complement function . 104 8.2.2 For–to and ECM constructions . 106 8.2.3 Areal distribution . 107 8.3 Object forms in subject function . 108 8.3.1 Subject and subject complement function . 111 8.3.2 Coordination . 114 8.3.3 Question tags . 115 8.3.4 No-verb utterances(1) . 116 8.3.5 Relative clauses and clefts . 119 8.3.6 Context hierarchy . 119 ii 8.3.7 Areal distribution . 120 8.4 Personal pronouns in reflexive function . 122 8.5 Independent self-forms . 124 8.5.1 Subject function . 126 8.5.2 Third person cases . 128 8.5.3 Subject complement function . 129 8.5.4 No-verb utterances(2) . 130 8.5.5 Object function . 131 8.5.6 Prepositional complement function . 131 8.6 Summary and revised definition . 133 9 Case variation in prepositional phrases . 135 9.1 Subject and self-forms in pronominal PPs . 135 9.2 ‛He’s as tall as me’ – as, like, than: prepositions or conjunctions? . 136 9.3 Snake sentences . 141 9.3.1 Discourse perspective . 143 9.3.2 Self-directed vs. other-directed verbs . 144 9.3.3 Corpus results . 145 9.4 Summary . 147 10 Gerunds and participles . 149 10.1 Structural and cognitive distinctions . 149 10.2 Distribution of case forms in the corpus . 153 10.3 Underlying differences in meaning . 154 10.3.1 Acting vs. action . 157 10.3.2 Hypothetical vs. actual . 159 10.3.3 ‛O-form + V-ing’ for a more vivid mode of expression . 161 10.4 Syntactic constraints . 162 10.5 Adverbial participles . 164 10.6 Summary . 167 11 Qualified pronouns . 169 11.1 Constructions with qualifier nouns and quantifiers . 169 11.1.1 Qualified vs. non-qualified NPs . 172 11.1.2 Synthetically vs. analytically qualified NPs . 176 11.2 Second person plurals . 179 11.3 ‛Oh deary me’: delexicalised exclamations. 182 11.4 Summary . 184 12 Pleonastic pronouns . 187 12.1 Overt you imperatives . 188 12.1.1 Structural subtypes . 188 12.1.2 Distribution in the corpus . 191 iii 12.2 Pleonastic reflexives after standard intransitive verbs . 192 12.2.1 Historical and typological perspective . 193 12.2.2 Pleonastic reflexives in FRED . 194 12.2.3 Possible explanations . 195 12.3 Benefactive objects . 199 12.3.1 Non-pleonastic occurrences . 200 12.3.2 Pleonastic occurrences . 201 12.4 Ethic datives and ethic PPs . 203 12.5 Disjunctive pronouns: emphasis, topicalisation, specification . 206 12.5.1 Disjunctive uses in FRED . 207 12.5.2 Preference for object case . 209 12.5.3 Disjunction and coordination – two distinct mechanisms . 211 12.5.4 Discourse functions . 212 12.5.5 Areal distribution . 215 12.6 Resumptive pronouns . 215 12.7 Summary . 218 13 Genitive variation . 221 13.1 The two genitives of English . 221 13.2 Quantitative distribution in the corpus, with focus on 3SGn cases . 225 13.3 Modifier–head relations . 234 13.3.1 Subjective vs. objective readings . 234 13.3.2 Relationality of the head noun . 236 13.4 Collocational preferences . 237 13.5 Summary . 242 14 Possessive function . 245 14.1 S-genitives: pronouns in possessive determiner function . 246 14.1.1 Possessive we and us . 246 14.1.2 Possessive thee . 250 14.2 Of-genitives: pronouns in possessive complement function . 251 14.3 Rare variants . 252 14.4 Summary . 254 15 Demonstrative function . 255 15.1 They and them demonstratives . 255 15.2 Syntactic environments . 257 15.3 Quantitative distribution in the corpus . 258 15.4 Areal distribution . 261 15.5 Applying collexeme analysis to dialect data . 262 15.5.1 Distinctive collexeme test . 262 15.5.2 Covarying collexeme test . 264 15.6 Summary . 266 iv III Synopsis and discussion 16 The major empirical results . 267 16.1 Areal distribution of non-standard pronouns . 267 16.2 Frequencies . 271 16.3 Case assignment . 273 17 Practical and theoretical implications . 277 17.1 Prioratisation of morphosyntactic categories . 277 17.2 Determinants of pronoun variation: a combined approach . 281 17.3 Pronoun pragmatics . 290 18 Conclusion and outlook . 295 Appendix A – Historical information 299 Appendix B – Coding information 301 Appendix C – Supplementary analysis data 303 Appendix D – Maps 308 References 311 Deutsche Zusammenfassung 335 v List of tables 3.1 Standard English paradigm of personal pronouns and reflexives . 34 4.1 Size and coverage of the FRED corpus and subcorpus . 42 4.2 Speaker distribution and text production by birth decade . 46 4.3 Speaker distribution and text production by speaker sex . 46 4.4 Spelling variants of the different pronouns in the corpus. 50 6.1 3SGn question tags . ..
Recommended publications
  • Does English Have a Genitive Case? Amyrose@Linguist.Umass.Edu

    Does English Have a Genitive Case? [email protected]

    2. Amy Rose Deal – University of Massachusetts, Amherst Does English have a genitive case? [email protected] In written English, possessive pronouns appear without ’s in the same environments where non-pronominal DPs require ’s. (1) a. your/*you’s/*your’s book b. Moore’s/*Moore book What explains this complementarity? Various analyses suggest themselves. A. Possessive pronouns are contractions of a pronoun and ’s. (Hudson 2003: 603) B. Possessive pronouns are inflected genitives (Huddleston and Pullum 2002); a morphological deletion rule removes clitic ’s after a genitive pronoun. Analysis A consists of a single rule of a familiar type: Morphological Merger (Halle and Marantz 1993), familiar from forms like wanna and won’t. (His and its contract especially nicely.) No special lexical/vocabulary items need be postulated. Analysis B, on the other hand, requires a set of vocabulary items to spell out genitive case, as well as a rule to delete the ’s clitic following such forms, assuming ’s is a DP-level head distinct from the inflecting noun. These two accounts make divergent predictions for dialects with complex pronominals such as you all or you guys (and us/them all, depending on the speaker). Since Merger operates under adjacency, Analysis A predicts that intervention by all or guys should bleed the formation of your: only you all’s and you guys’ are predicted. There do seem to be dialects with this property, as witnessed by the American Heritage Dictionary (4th edition, entry for you-all). Call these English 1. Here, we may claim that pronouns inflect for only two cases, and Merger operations account for the rest.
  • “The Relative Pronoun” As Has Been the Case in the Last Several Chapters

    “The Relative Pronoun” As Has Been the Case in the Last Several Chapters

    CHAPTER 17 “Te Relatve Pronoun” As has been te case in te last several chaptrs, tis chaptr realy doesn’t confont te neophyt wit a lot of new grammatcal concepts; it builds on knowledge already mastred. Stl it’s going t take a litle patence, but we’l go slowly. Before we get t te relatve pronoun per se, we’re going t clean up a syntactcal point you’ve already been working wit, but may not have yet a firm conceptual understanding of. Let’s look at what we mean by a “clause”. THE CLAUSE You al remember te junior high school definiton of a sentnce: it’s a complet tought. And by tat we mean a tought which includes a noun, eiter expressed or implied, and a verb, eiter expressed or implied. Tat is, a complet tought must involve someting which is doing someting or which is being held up for descripton: “Te road is blocked”; “Te tee fel down”; and so on. Now, te human mind is a wonderfl ting. It reasons and perceives dozens of different kinds relatonships between events, tings, and ideas. It arranges events and facts logicaly and tmporaly, and in levels of priorit. Tat is t say, it takes two or more tings, tings which are separat ideas, separat visions, and weaves tem tgeter conceptualy and linguistcaly int what we “reasoning”. Te way tis reasoning is expressed in language is caled “syntax”, which litraly means “arranging tgeter”; puting tgeter events and tings and facts. For example, te two separat ideas or visions -- “te road is blocked” and “te tee fel down” -- might have a causal relatonship, which te mind instantly recognizes and expresses linguistcaly wit an appropriat conjuncton: “Te road is blocked because te tee fel down”.
  • Participial Relative Clauses

    Participial Relative Clauses

    UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository) Participial Relative Clauses Sleeman, P. DOI 10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.185 Publication date 2017 Document Version Other version Published in Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics Link to publication Citation for published version (APA): Sleeman, P. (2017). Participial Relative Clauses. In M. Aronoff (Ed.), Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics [185] (Oxford Research Encyclopedias). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.185 General rights It is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). Disclaimer/Complaints regulations If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible. UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (https://dare.uva.nl) Download date:01 Oct 2021 Participial relative clauses Petra Sleeman Sleeman, P. Mar 2017, Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics. Aronoff, M. (ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, (Oxford Research Encyclopedias). Summary Relative clauses of which the predicate contains a present, past or passive participle can be used in a reduced form.
  • English Grammar for Students of French

    English Grammar for Students of French

    English Grammar for Students of French The Study Guide for Those Learning French Seventh edition Jacqueline Morton with the collaboration of Hélène Neu, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor The Olivia and Hill Press® THE O&H STUDY GUIDES Jacqueline Morton, editor English Grammar for Students of Spanish English Grammar for Students of French English Grammar for Students of German English Grammar for Students of Italian English Grammar for Students of Latin English Grammar for Students of Russian English Grammar for Students of Japanese English Grammar for Students of Arabic English Grammar for Students of Chinese Gramática española para estudiantes de inglés © 2013, Jacqueline Morton All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or trans- mitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or by any information storage retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Printed in the U.S.A. ISBN: 978-0-934034-42-5 Library of Congress Control Number: 2013930691 CONTENTS Study Tips 1 Tips for learning grammar 1 Tips for learning vocabulary 2 Tips for learning word forms 4 Tips for effective study 4 1. What’s in a Word? 6 Meaning 6 Part of speech 6 Function 7 Form 7 2. What is a Noun? 9 3. What is Meant by Gender? 11 4. What is Meant by Number? 14 Hearing the plural 15 5. What is an Article? 16 Definite articles 16 Indefinite articles 18 Non-count nouns and partitive articles` 20 Study Tips — Nouns and their gender 21 6. What is the Possessive? 22 7.
  • Immigration in Rural Newfoundland: Individual and Community Change Willow Jackson Anderson

    Immigration in Rural Newfoundland: Individual and Community Change Willow Jackson Anderson

    University of New Mexico UNM Digital Repository Communication ETDs Electronic Theses and Dissertations 7-1-2012 Immigration in rural Newfoundland: Individual and community change Willow Jackson Anderson Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/cj_etds Recommended Citation Jackson Anderson, Willow. "Immigration in rural Newfoundland: Individual and community change." (2012). https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/cj_etds/30 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Electronic Theses and Dissertations at UNM Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Communication ETDs by an authorized administrator of UNM Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Willow Jackson Anderson Candidate Communication and Journalism Department This dissertation is approved, and it is acceptable in quality and form for publication: Approved by the Dissertation Committee: Karen A. Foss, Chairperson John G. Oeztel Pam Lutgen-Sandvik Magdalena Avila i IMMIGRATION IN RURAL NEWFOUNDLAND: INDIVIDUAL AND COMMUNITY CHANGE BY WILLOW JACKSON ANDERSON B.A. Political Science and History, Mount Allison University, 1996 M.A. Conflict Resolution, University of Bradford, 1999 DISSERTATION Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Communication The University of New Mexico Albuquerque, New Mexico July, 2012 ii DEDICATION I would like to dedicate this work to two of my nieces, (my muses), Kaia and Madeline Jackson-Perez and their Uncle Dave. Kaia and Madeline: Thank you for the fun sleepovers, dramatic dance routines, and loads of (fun) book reading. May you flourish and grow and always be confident in your place. Dave, I would not have survived this process unscathed without you.
  • Possessive Constructions in Modern Low Saxon

    Possessive Constructions in Modern Low Saxon

    POSSESSIVE CONSTRUCTIONS IN MODERN LOW SAXON a thesis submitted to the department of linguistics of stanford university in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of master of arts Jan Strunk June 2004 °c Copyright by Jan Strunk 2004 All Rights Reserved ii I certify that I have read this thesis and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts. Joan Bresnan (Principal Adviser) I certify that I have read this thesis and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts. Tom Wasow I certify that I have read this thesis and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts. Dan Jurafsky iii iv Abstract This thesis is a study of nominal possessive constructions in modern Low Saxon, a West Germanic language which is closely related to Dutch, Frisian, and German. After identifying the possessive constructions in current use in modern Low Saxon, I give a formal syntactic analysis of the four most common possessive constructions within the framework of Lexical Functional Grammar in the ¯rst part of this thesis. The four constructions that I will analyze in detail include a pronominal possessive construction with a possessive pronoun used as a determiner of the head noun, another prenominal construction that resembles the English s-possessive, a linker construction in which a possessive pronoun occurs as a possessive marker in between a prenominal possessor phrase and the head noun, and a postnominal construction that involves the preposition van/von/vun and is largely parallel to the English of -possessive.
  • Minimal Pronouns, Logophoricity and Long-Distance Reflexivisation in Avar

    Minimal Pronouns, Logophoricity and Long-Distance Reflexivisation in Avar

    Minimal pronouns, logophoricity and long-distance reflexivisation in Avar* Pavel Rudnev Revised version; 28th January 2015 Abstract This paper discusses two morphologically related anaphoric pronouns inAvar (Avar-Andic, Nakh-Daghestanian) and proposes that one of them should be treated as a minimal pronoun that receives its interpretation from a λ-operator situated on a phasal head whereas the other is a logophoric pro- noun denoting the author of the reported event. Keywords: reflexivity, logophoricity, binding, syntax, semantics, Avar 1 Introduction This paper has two aims. One is to make a descriptive contribution to the crosslin- guistic study of long-distance anaphoric dependencies by presenting an overview of the properties of two kinds of reflexive pronoun in Avar, a Nakh-Daghestanian language spoken natively by about 700,000 people mostly living in the North East Caucasian republic of Daghestan in the Russian Federation. The other goal is to highlight the relevance of the newly introduced data from an understudied lan- guage to the theoretical debate on the nature of reflexivity, long-distance anaphora and logophoricity. The issue at the heart of this paper is the unusual character of theanaphoric system in Avar, which is tripartite. (1) is intended as just a preview with more *The present material was presented at the Utrecht workshop The World of Reflexives in August 2011. I am grateful to the workshop’s audience and participants for their questions and comments. I am indebted to Eric Reuland and an anonymous reviewer for providing valuable feedback on the first draft, as well as to Yakov Testelets for numerous discussions of anaphora-related issues inAvar spanning several years.
  • The Grammaticalization of Demonstratives: a Comparative Analysis

    The Grammaticalization of Demonstratives: a Comparative Analysis

    Nicholas Catasso 7 Journal of Universal Language 12-1 March 2011, 7-46 The Grammaticalization of Demonstratives: A Comparative Analysis Nicholas Catasso Università Ca’ Foscari di Venezia * Abstract An article, irrespective of its distribution across natural languages, dialects and varieties, is a member of the class of determiners which particularizes a noun according to language-specific principles of grammatical and semantic structuring. Definite articles in Indo- European languages – in those grammatical systems where they are present – are derived from ancient demonstratives through a grammaticalization process: given that demonstratives are deictic expressions (i.e. they depend on a frame of reference which is external to that of the speaker and of the interlocutor) with the role of selecting a referent or a set of referents, it is easy to understand what the role of “universal quantifier” of the, which is in English the prototypical – but questionable – example of definiteness, is due to. Demonstratives are frequently reanalyzed across languages as grammatical markers (very often as definite articles, but also as copulas, relative and third person pronouns, sentence connectives, Nicholas Catasso Dipartimento di Scienze del Linguaggio - Dorsoduro 3462 - VENEZIA 30123 (VE) Phone 0039-3463157243; Email: [email protected] Received Oct. 2010; Reviewed Dec. 2010; Revised version received Jan. 2011. 8 The Grammaticalization of Demonstratives: A Comparative Analysis focus markers, etc.). In this article I concentrate on the grammaticalization of the definite article in English, adopting a comparative-contrastive approach (including a wide range of Indo- European languages), given the complexity of the article. Keywords: grammaticalization, definite articles, English, Indo- European languages, definiteness 1.
  • The Morphology of Modern Western Abenaki

    The Morphology of Modern Western Abenaki

    The Morphology of Modern Western Abenaki Jesse Beach ‘04 Honors Thesis Dartmouth College Program of Linguistics & Cognitive Science Primary Advisor: Prof. David Peterson Secondary Advisor: Prof. Lindsay Whaley May 17, 2004 Acknowledgements This project has commanded a considerable amount of my attention and time over the past year. The research has lead me not only into Algonquian linguistics, but has also introduced me to the world of Native American cultures. The history of the Abenaki people fascinated me as much as their language. I must extnd my fullest appreciate to my advisor David Peterson, who time and again proposed valuable reference suggestions and paths of analysis. The encouragement he offered was indispensable during the research and writing stages of this thesis. He also went meticulously through the initial drafts of this document offering poignant comments on content as well as style. My appreciation also goes to my secondary advisor Lindsay Whaley whose door is always open for a quick chat. His suggestions helped me broaden the focus of my research. Although I was ultimately unable to arrange the field research component of this thesis, the generosity of the Dean of Faculty’s Office and the Richter Memorial Trust Grant that I received from them assisted me in gaining a richer understanding of the current status of the Abenaki language. With the help of this grant, I was able to travel to Odanak, Quebec to meet the remaining speakers of Abenaki. From these conversations I was able to locate additional materials that aided me tremendously in my analysis. Many individuals have offered me assistance in one form or another throughout the unfolding of my research.
  • Types of Pronouns in English with Examples

    Types of Pronouns in English with Examples

    Types Of Pronouns In English With Examples If unpainted or hedgy Lucian usually convoke his bisexuals frazzling spotlessly or chain-stitch revilingly and damans.unamusingly, Unpreparedly how thinned legal, is Eddie?Durand Bomb tussled and hesitator culinary and Ossie pare always hemp. sanitized unbecomingly and fiddle his Learn with pronouns might be correct when they need are two personal pronouns refer to reflexive Such as a type of mutual respect that are used are like modern english grammar might be a noun. What i know how to their requested pronouns in english with pronouns examples of. Pronouns exemplify such a word class, or rather several smaller classes united by an important semantic distinction between them and all the major parts of speech. This is the meaning of english pronouns in with examples of mine, and a legal barriers often make. Common pronouns include I, me, mine, she, he, it, we, and us. New York Times best selling author, Tim Ferriss. This information was once helpful! Asused here in its demonstrative meaning, to introduce a parenthetical clause. The Health Sciences Library is open to Health Sciences affiliates. That and those refer to something less near to the speaker. Notice that occur relative clauses are within commas, and if removed they do these change the meaning being expressed in a one way, believe the sentences still a sense. Well, I managed to while speaking Italian after about month. The meal is receiving feedback will be delivered a speech. The examples of in english with pronouns specify a pronoun usage in the action is.
  • Dissertations, Department of Linguistics

    Dissertations, Department of Linguistics

    UC Berkeley Dissertations, Department of Linguistics Title Reflexivization: A Study in Universal Syntax Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/3sv079tk Author Faltz, Leonard M Publication Date 1977 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California INFORMATION TO USERS This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph end reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will finda good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap.
  • Gender Differences in the Personal Pronouns Usage on the Corpus of Congressional Speeches

    Gender Differences in the Personal Pronouns Usage on the Corpus of Congressional Speeches

    jrds (print) issn 2052-417x jrds (online) issn 2052-4188 Article Gender differences in the personal pronouns usage on the corpus of congressional speeches Dragana Bozic Lenard Abstract Gender differences in language have been extensively investigated by sociolinguists since the 1960s. This paper aimed to study gender differences in the personal pro- nouns usage on the corpus of the 113th United States Congress. All uninterrupted speeches (672 by women and 3,655 by men) whose transcripts were downloaded from the official repository Thomas were analyzed with the text analysis software Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count calculating the degree to which the politicians use personal pronouns. In addition, the computational analysis results were further analyzed with the software for statistical analysis SPSS. The quantitative analysis results pointed to minor statistically significant gender differences in the personal pronouns usage. However, the qualitative analysis showed more subtle gender differ- ences pointing to linguistic changes in stereotypization. Keywords: congressional speeches; gender differences; LIWC; SPSS; personal pronouns 1. Introduction Language is one of the most important means of humans’ expression of thoughts. Guided by thoughts, choices people make in the forms of expres- sion can be paralleled to their perception of things from the real world and consequently the way they express themselves about those things. Hence, two people may be speaking about the same thing with their descriptions being Affiliation University of Osijek, Osijek, Croatia. email: [email protected] jrds vol 3.2 2016 161–188 https://doi.org/10.1558/jrds.30111 ©2017, equinox publishing 162 Gender differences in personal pronouns usage utterly unrelated.