A Corpus-Based Study of Mandative Subjunctive Triggers in Published Research Articles Pamela Jo Pearson Iowa State University
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Retrospective Theses and Dissertations Dissertations 2007 A corpus-based study of mandative subjunctive triggers in published research articles Pamela Jo Pearson Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd Part of the English Language and Literature Commons, Linguistics Commons, and the Rhetoric and Composition Commons Recommended Citation Pearson, Pamela Jo, "A corpus-based study of mandative subjunctive triggers in published research articles" (2007). Retrospective Theses and Dissertations. 14534. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd/14534 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Retrospective Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A corpus -based study of mandative subjunctive triggers in published research articles by Pamela Jo Pearson A thesis submitted to the graduate faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Major: Teaching English as a Seco nd Language/Applied Linguistics (English for Specific Purposes) and (Literacy in English as a Second Language) Program of Study Committee: Viviana Corte s, Major Professor Barb ara Schwarte Dawn Bratsch -Prince Iowa State Universi ty Ames, Iowa 2007 Copyright © Pamela Jo Pearson , 2007 . All rights reserved. UMI Number: 1443067 UMI Microform 1443067 Copyright 2007 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES……………………………………………………… …………………… iv LIST OF FIGURES…………………………………… ………. …………………………….. v LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS……… .. ………………….…………….v ii ABSTRACT …………………………………… ……….. ………………………… …...… .. viii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ………… ... ………………… .……………………… …….1 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ………………………… …. …... ………… .. ……… 4 2.1. T he Subjunctive……………………... ……………………………………… .. ………….4 2.2. The Mandative Subjunctive ... ……………..…… .………………… ……………………... 6 2.3. Corpus Linguist ics …………………………………………..……………………………8 2.4. A Corpus -Based Approach to Grammar………………………………………………….9 2.5. Previous Corpus -Based Investigations of the Mandative Subjunctive .... ...........................9 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY …………… …………………… ………………… .. ……12 3.1 . The Corpus ………………………………………………………………………………12 3.2 . The Concordancing Program ……………………………………………………………13 3.3 . Procedures ………………………………………………………………………….….... 15 3.3 .1 . Preliminary Analysis : Frequency ………………………………………… ……... .... ... 15 3.3 .2. Secondary Analysis : Form …………………………… .………………… …… ... ….... 16 3.3 .3. Tertiary Analysis : Pattern……………... …………… .. ………………….. ….…… …. 17 3.3 .4. Quaternary Analysis : Structure.. ……………………………………………… ... …. ... 19 3.3 .5. Quinary Analysis : Function... ………………………………………………… …... .... 19 CHAP TER 4: RESULTS…………………… ... .. …………………… .…………… ... ……... 22 4.1. Preliminary Analysis : Frequency……………………………………………… …... ….. 22 4.2. Secondary Analysis: F orm…………………………….……………………………… .. 24 4.3. Tertiary Analysis : Pattern…………….. ……………..……………………………... …. 28 4.4. Quaternar y Analysis : Structure .……………………………………………………....... 35 4.5. Quinary Anal ysis: Function...………………………………... ……………………....... 36 CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION S…………………… ………... …… .... 41 5.1. Summary of the Results……………………………………………… …… …... ............. 41 5.2. I nterpretations ……………………………………………………… ………… ... …….... 42 5.3. Pedagogical Implications and Applications ………………………………… …... ……... 45 5.4. Limitations ………………………………………………………… ………… ... ………. 46 5.5. Suggestions for Further Research ……………………………………… …… ... ……….. 47 5.6. Con clusions… ……………………………………………………… ……… …………... 49 iii APPENDIX A: List of Realizations of the Lexical Items and their Frequencies in the ISURAC …………………………………………………………………. 51 APPENDIX B: Instances of Co -occurrences Compared: With and without That -clauses…… .……………………………………… ………………… …….… .. 52 APPENDIX C: Complete Listing of Occurrences of Mandative Subjun ctive Structures in the ISURAC… …..……… ………………. ……………………… .54 REFERENCES ………………………… …………………………… ……………… ... ……. 60 ACKNOWLEDGEME NTS………………………………………………… ……… .. ……... 64 iv LIST OF TABLES Tab le 2.1: An Overview of the Subjunctive in English Grammars………………… ….…….5 Table 3.1: The Iowa State University Research Article Corpus (ISURAC) by Discipline and Word Count…………...………………………………… .………………12 Table 3.2: Composition of the Sub -Corpus/Sub -Corpo ra……….…… .. ……………………13 Table 3.3: Summary of the Data Analysis Procedures……………………………...……....21 Table 4.1: Preliminary Concordance Results: Unanalyzed Strings…… .…………………..22 Table 4.2: Preliminary Concordance Results Less Extraneous Uses………………..…….. 23 Table 4.3: Five Most Frequent Realizations of the Lexical Items in the ISURAC ……………………………………………………………………………... ... …… .24 Table 4.4: Frequency Distributions of the Lexical Items as Verb Constituents…… .................................................... ..................................................... .. ……..27 Table 4.5: Instances and Percentage of That -clause Co -occurrence by Lexical Item ……………………………………………….…………………………… …… 28 Table 4.6: Distributions of the Grammatical Pattern of the That - Complemen t Clause ……………………………………………… …… …………………… .29 Table 4.7: Distributions of the Grammatical Pattern of Zero That -Complement Clauses ……………………………………..………………………… ….34 Table 4.8: Structural Analysis: Verb Forms of Main Clauses and Complement Clauses …………………………………. .………………………………… …. 35 v LIST OF FIGURES Figure 3.1: S ample C oncord ance R eturn for require in the Biology S ub - corpus…….... .................................................................................................................... .......14 Figure 3. 2: Sample Concordance R eturn for requir * in the Biology S ub - corpus……… …………………………………………………………………………….. .....15 Figure 3.3: Frequency of Lexical Items as Verb s in the ISURAC…………………...……...17 Figure 3.4: Taxonomy for Classifying Verb Form in the That - Comp lement Clause ………………………………………………………………… …… .…19 Figure 3.5: Taxonomy for Classifying the Function of MS and Non -MS Structures… ………………………………………………….………………………... ….…20 Figure 4.1: ask ……………………………………………………………………… .………25 Figure 4.2: demand …………………………………………………………… .………...…..25 Figure 4.3: direct ………………………………………………………… …. ………………25 Figure 4.4: insist ………………………………………………….…………………………25 Figure 4.5: order ……………………………………………….……………………………25 Figure 4.6: propose ……………………………………………….…………………………25 Figure 4.7: recommend ……………………… …… …………………………………...……26 Figure 4.8: request ………………………………………………………………..…………26 Figure 4.9: require ……… …………………………………………..………………...…….26 Figure 4.10: suggest …………………………………………………………………………26 Figure 4.11: Frequency of Lexical Items as Verbs in the ISURAC…………… …… ……...27 Figure 4.12: That -clause Co -occurrence vs. Non -co -occurrence by Lexical Item…… ............................................................................................................. .. …..29 Figure 4.13: Percentages of Structures Trigger ed by Lexical Item…………………...…….31 Figure 4.14: Function of MS Structures in Applied Linguistics…………… ... ……..……....37 vi Figure 4.15: Function of MS Structures i n Biology……………..………………..………...37 Figure 4.16: Function of MS Structures in Business………… ………… ………… ….…….38 Figure 4.17: Function of MS Structures in Electrical Engineering………… .. ………..…....38 Figure 4.18: Functional Analysis of MS Structures: Proposed Course of Action… …………………………………………………………………. ……….39 Figure 4.19: Functional Analysis of MS Structur es: Other………………………………...40 vii LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS AmE American English AL Applied l inguistics BrE British English DD L Data -driven learning EAP English for academic p urposes ISURAC Iowa State University Research Article Corp us KWIC Key word in c ontext MS Mandative subjunctive MST Mandative subjunctive trigger SLA Second language a cquisition Ani Sci Animal Science App Ling Applied Linguistics Arch Architecture Art & Des Art and Design Bio Biology Bus Busi ness Econ Economics Elec Eng Electrical and Computer Engineering Mat Eng Materials and Civil Engineering Phys & Ast Physics and Astronomy Stat Statistics Inf Infinitive Ing -ing clause M aux Modal auxiliary Non -subj Non -subju nctive Pass Passive P aux Primary auxiliary Perf Perfect Subj Subjunctive viii ABSTRACT This corpus -based investigation of the mandative subjunctive (MS) (Quirk & Greenbaum, 1973) explored the structure as it co -occurred in pu blished research articles with 10 lexical items previously identified as MS triggers (Overgaard, 1995; Peters, 1998; Crawford & Albakry, 2004): ask, demand, direct, insist, order, propose, recommend, request, require and suggest . Through a variety of qua ntitative (frequency, form and pattern) and qualitative (function) analyses, the present study examined the use of these lexical items in a corpus of published research articles ( 1.75 million words) by authors in four academic disciplines (Applied Linguis tics, Biology, Business and Electrical & Computer Engineering) with the purpose of identifying the discourse factors that contribute to the triggering of the MS structure in academic writing as its main objective. Results of the quantitative analyses