Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| 20160226-ritt [2022-04-02 14:51] – external edit 127.0.0.1 | 20160226-ritt [2022-04-02 17:39] (current) – Péter Szigetvári | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| === Obligatorification in grammatical change: Experimental approaches to the spread of (in-)definiteness marking in Early English | === Obligatorification in grammatical change: Experimental approaches to the spread of (in-)definiteness marking in Early English | ||
| - | [[this> | + | [[this> |
| The talk reports work done together with Olga Féher and Kenny Smith (both from the University of Edinburgh). It deals with article emergence in Early English, focussing on the spread of grammars in which first the definiteness (cf. McColl Millar 2000, Sommerer 2012) and later the indefiniteness (cf. Rissanen 1967) of NP reference was obligatorily marked (with //the// and //a(n)// as default markers). We address the question why emerging grammars with obligatory (in-)definiteness marking managed to spread among speakers for whom it must — in early phases — still have been optional. | The talk reports work done together with Olga Féher and Kenny Smith (both from the University of Edinburgh). It deals with article emergence in Early English, focussing on the spread of grammars in which first the definiteness (cf. McColl Millar 2000, Sommerer 2012) and later the indefiniteness (cf. Rissanen 1967) of NP reference was obligatorily marked (with //the// and //a(n)// as default markers). We address the question why emerging grammars with obligatory (in-)definiteness marking managed to spread among speakers for whom it must — in early phases — still have been optional. | ||