Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T04:42:22.382Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Syntactic variation in ‘need’-constructions in Estonian dialects

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 November 2017

Liina Lindström  and
Kristel Uiboaed
Liina Lindström
Affiliation:
University of Tartu, Institute of Estonian and General Linguistics, Jakobi 2, 51014 Tartu, Estonia. liina.lindstrom@ut.ee
Kristel Uiboaed
Affiliation:
University of Tartu, Institute of Estonian and General Linguistics, Jakobi 2, 51014 Tartu, Estonia. kristel.uiboaed@ut.ee
Get access

Abstract

The article contributes new data and findings to the growing field of corpus-based dialect syntax research. The focus of the paper is on variation in ‘need’-constructions (tarvis/vaja olema + nominal complement/infinitive ‘need to’) based on the corpus of Estonian dialects. Our purpose was to demonstrate the complex nature of syntactic variation, constrained geographically, individually or by language-internal factors. The study takes a corpus-based quantitative approach to observing the geographical spread of linguistic units. We apply conditional inference tree and random forests models to capture the (co)varying parts of the construction studied. Our results show that variation in different parts of constructions is influenced by different factors, both geographical and language-internal. Lexical variation (adverb tarvis ‘need’ or vaja ‘need’) and omission of the copula are clearly geographically distributed, while omission of the experiencer is determined mainly by language-internal factors. However, the study has also found extensive inter-individual differences.

Keywords

dialect syntaxEstonian dialectslanguage contactmodal constructionssyntactic variation
Type
Research Article
Information
Nordic Journal of Linguistics , Volume 40 , Issue 3 , December 2017 , pp. 313 - 349
Copyright
Copyright © Nordic Association of Linguistics 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Baayen, R. Harald, Endresen, Anna, Janda, Laura A., Makarova, Anastasia & Nesset, Tore. 2013. Making choices in Russian: Pros and cons of statistical methods for rival forms. Russian Linguistics 37 (3), 253–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breiman, Leo. 2001. Random Forests. Machine Learning 45 (1), 5–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bucheli Berger, Claudia, Glaser, Elvira & Seiler, Guido. 2012. Is a syntactic dialectology possible? Contributions from Swiss German. In Ender, Andrea, Leemann, Adrian & Wälchli, Bernhard (eds.), Methods in Contemporary Linguistics (Trends in Linguistics: Studies and Monographs 247), 93–120. Berlin & Boston, MA: De Gruyter Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Čekmonas, Valeriy. 2001. Russian varieties in the southeastern Baltic area: Rural dialects. In Dahl, & Koptjevskaja-Tamm, (eds.), vol. 1, 101–136.Google Scholar
Croft, William. 2001. Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahl, Östen & Maria, Koptjevskaja-Tamm. (eds.). 2001. Circum-Baltic Languages: Typology and Contact, vol. 1: Past and Present & vol. 2: Grammar and Typology (Studies in Language Companion Series 54–55). Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Erelt, Mati, Erelt, Tiiu & Ross, Kristiina. 2000. Eesti keele käsiraamat [Handbook of the Estonian language]. Tallinn: Eesti Keele Sihtasutus.Google Scholar
Erelt, Mati, Kasik, Reet, Metslang, Helle, Rajandi, Henno, Ross, Kristiina, Saari, Henn, Tael, Kaja & Vare, Silvi. 1993. Eesti keele grammatika II. Süntaks. Lisa: kiri [Estonian reference grammar II: Syntax]. Tallinn: Eesti Teaduste Akadeemia Keele ja Kirjanduse Instituut.Google Scholar
Grieve, Jack. 2009. A Corpus-based Regional Dialect Survey of Grammatical Variation in Written Standard American English. Ph.D. dissertation, Northern Arizona University.Google Scholar
Guy, Gregory R. 1980. Variation in the group and the individual: The case of final stop deletion. In Labov, William (ed.), Locating Language in Time and Space, 1–36. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Haak, Anu, Juhkam, Evi, Kallasmaa, Marja, Kask, Arnold, Niit, Ellen, Norvik, Piret, Oja, Vilja, Sepp, Aldi, Simm, J. & Viikberg, Jüri. 1989. Väike murdesõnastik II [Small Estonian dialect dictionary], edited by Valdek Pall. Tallinn: Valgus. Keele ja Kirjanduse Instituut.Google Scholar
Hansen, Björn. 2005. How to measure areal convergence: A case study of contact-induced grammaticalization in the German–Hungarian–Slavonic contact area. In Hansen, Björn & Karlík, Petr (eds.), Modality in Slavonic Languages: New Perspectives, 219–237. München: Sagner.Google Scholar
Hansen, Björn. 2014. The syntax of modal polyfunctionality revisited: Evidence from the languages of Europe. In Leiss, Elisabeth & Abraham, Werner (eds.), Modes of Modality: Modality, Typology, and Universal Grammar (Studies in Language Companion Series 149), 89–126. Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, Björn & de Haan, Ferdinand (eds.). 2009. Modals in the Languages of Europe. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrell, Frank E. Jr. 2001. Regression Modeling Strategies: With Applications to Linear Models, Logistic Regression, and Survival Analysis. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd & Kuteva, Tanja. 2005. Language Contact and Grammatical Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holvoet, Axel. 2001. Studies in the Latvian Verb. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego.Google Scholar
Holvoet, Axel. 2009. Modals in Baltic. In Hansen, & de Haan, (eds.), 199–228.Google Scholar
Hothorn, Torsten, Hornik, Kurt & Zeileis, Achim. 2006. Unbiased recursive partitioning: A conditional inference framework. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics 15 (3), 651–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hothorn, Torsten, Bühlmann, Peter, Dudoit, Sandrine, Molinaro, Annette & Van Der Laan, Mark J.. 2006. Survival ensembles. Biostatistics 7 (3), 355–373.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
ISK = Auli Hakulinen, Vilkuna, Maria, Korhonen, Riitta, Koivisto, Vesa, Heinonen, Tarja Riitta & Alho, Irja. 2004. Iso suomen kielioppi [Comprehensive grammar of Finnish]. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.Google Scholar
Janda, Laura [A.]. 2008. Transitivity in Russian from a cognitive perspective. In Kustova, Galina (ed.), Dinamičeskie modeli: Slovo. Predloženie. Tekst. Sbornik statej v čest' E. V. Padučevoj, 970–988. Moscow: Jazyki slavjanskoj kul'tury.Google Scholar
Kaalep, Heiki-Jaan & Muischnek, Kadri. 2002. Eesti kirjakeele sagedussõnastik [A frequency dictionary of Estonian]. Tartu: Ülikooli Kirjastus.Google Scholar
Kalnača, Andra. 2013. Darbības vārda vajadzēt modālā semantika [Modal semantics of verb VAJADZĒT ‘to need’]. Vārds un tā pētīšanas aspekti 17 (1), 80–88. Liepāja: Liepājas Universitāte.Google Scholar
Kask, Arnold. 1984. Eesti murded ja kirjakeel [Estonian dialects and written language]. Tallinn: Valgus.Google Scholar
Keenan, Edward. 1976. Towards a universal definition of ‘subject’. In Lee, Charles N. (ed.), Subject and Topic, 303–334. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kehayov, Petar. 2009. Olema-verbi ellipsist eesti kirjakeeles [Ellipsis of the Verb olema in Written Estonian]. Emakeele Seltsi aastaraamat 2008 (54), 107–152.Google Scholar
Kehayov, Petar, Lindström, Liina & Niit, Ellen. 2011. Imperative in interrogatives in Estonian (Kihnu), Latvian and Livonian. Linguistica Uralica 47 (2), 81–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kehayov, Petar & Torn-Leesik, Reeli. 2009. Modal verbs in Balto-Finnic. In Hansen, & de Haan, (eds.), 363–401.Google Scholar
Klaas-Lang, Birute & Norvik, Miina. 2014. Balti areaali tüpoloogilisi sarnasusi morfosüntaksi valdkonnas [Typological similarities in morphosyntax in the Baltic area]. Keel ja Kirjandus 8–9, 590–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klavan, Jane, Pilvik, Marja-Liisa & Uiboaed, Kristel. 2015. The use of multivariate statistical classification models for predicting constructional choice in spoken, non-standard varieties of Estonian. SKY Journal of Linguistics 28, 187–224.Google Scholar
Koit, Enn. 1963. Eitus saarte murdes [Negation in insular dialect]. In Ariste, Paul & Pall, Valdek (eds.), Nonaginta: Johannes Voldemar Veski 90. sünnipäevaks 27. juunil 1963. Special issue of Emakeele Seltsi toimetised 6, 136–147.Google Scholar
Koptjevskaja-Tamm, Maria & Wälchli, Bernhard. 2001. The Circum-Baltic Languages: An Areal-typological Approach. In Dahl, & Koptjevskaja-Tamm, (eds.), vol. 2, 615–750.Google Scholar
Kortmann, Bernd. 2010. Areal variation in syntax. In Auer, Peter & Schmidt, Jürgen E. (eds.), Language and Space: Theories and Methods. An International Handbook of Linguistic Variation, 837–864. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter Google Scholar
Kyröläinen, Aki-Juhani. 2013. Reflexive Space: A Constructionist Model of the Russian Reflexive Marker. Turku: University of Turku.Google Scholar
Laitinen, Lea. 1992. Välttämättömyys ja persoona. Suomen murteiden nesessiivisten rakenteiden semantiikkaa ja kielioppia [Necessity and person: The semantics and grammar of necessive structures in Finnish dialects]. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.Google Scholar
Lindström, Liina. 2017. Partitive subjects in Estonian dialects. In Lindström, Liina & Huumo, Tuomas (eds.), Grammar in Use: Approaches to Baltic-Finnic: Special issue of Journal of Estonian and Finno-Ugric Linguistics 8(2), 191–231.Google Scholar
Lindström, Liina, Kalmus, Mervi, Klaus, Anneliis, Bakhoff, Liisi & Pajusalu, Karl. 2009. Ainsuse 1. isikule viitamine eesti murretes [The first person singular reference in Estonian dialects]. Emakeele Seltsi aastaraamat 2008 (54), 159–185.Google Scholar
Lindström, Liina, Pilvik, Maarja-Liisa, Ruutma, Mirjam & Uiboaed, Kristel. 2017. On the use of perfect and pluperfect in Estonian dialects: Frequency and language contacts. In Björklöf, Sofia & Jantunen, Santra (eds.), Plurilingual Finnic: Change of Finnic Languages in a Multilinguistic Environment, 51–89. Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society.Google Scholar
Lindström, Liina, Pilvik, Maarja-Liisa, Ruutma, Mirjam & Uiboaed, Kristel. 2015. Mineviku liitaegade kasutusest eesti murretes keelekontaktide valguses [The use of the compound past tenses in Estonian dialects in the light of language contacts]. Võro Instituudi toimõndusõq 29, 39–70.Google Scholar
Lindström, Liina & Tragel, Ilona. 2010. The possessive perfect construction in Estonian. Folia Linguistica 44 (2), 371–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindström, Liina, Uiboaed, Kristel, Vihman, Virve-Anneli. 2014. Varieerumine tarvis/vaja-konstruktsioonides keelekontaktide valguses [Variation in Estonian ‘need’-constructions in the light of language contacts]. Keel ja Kirjandus 8–9, 609–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindström, Liina & Vihman, Virve-Anneli. 2017. Who needs it? Variation in experiencer marking in Estonian ‘need’-constructions. Journal of Linguistics 53 (4), 789–822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mets, Mari. 2010. Suhtlusvõrgustikud reaalajas: võru kõnekeele varieerumine kahes Võrumaa külas [Social networks in real time: Variation in spoken Võro in two villages of Võru County] (Dissertationes philologiae estonicae universitatis tartuensis 25). Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus.Google Scholar
Metslang, Helena. 2013. Coding and behaviour of Estonian subjects. Journal of Estonian and Finno-Ugric Linguistics 4 (2), 217–293.Google Scholar
Metslang, Helle. 2009. Estonian grammar between Finnic and SAE: Some comparisons. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 62 (1/2), 49–71.Google Scholar
Metslang, Helle & Lindström, Liina. 2017. Essive in Estonian. In de Groot, Casper (ed.), Uralic Essive and the Expression of Impermanent State (Typological Studies in Language 119), 57–91. Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Metsmägi, Iris, Sedrik, Meeli & Soosaar, Sven-Erik. 2012. Eesti etümoloogiasõnaraamat [Estonian etymological dictionary]. Tallinn: Eesti Keele Sihtasutus.Google Scholar
Must, Mari. 1987. Kirderannikumurre [North Eastern Coastal Dialect]. Tallinn: Valgus.Google Scholar
Must, Mari & Univere, Aili. 2002. Põhjaeesti keskmurre: häälikulisi ja morfoloogilisi peajooni [North Estonian Mid Dialect: Phonological and morphological features] (Eesti Keele Instituudi Toimetised 10). Tallinn: Eesti Keele Instituut.Google Scholar
Neetar, Helmi. 1964. Aluse ja öeldise ühildumist mõjutavatest teguritest eesti murretes [Subject and predicate agreement in Estonian dialects]. Emakeele Seltsi aastaraamat 1964 (10), 151–166.Google Scholar
Neetar, Helmi. 1970. Määrsõnalisest täiendist eesti murretes [Adverbial attribute in Estonian dialects]. Emakeele Seltsi aastaraamat 16 (1970), 195–206.Google Scholar
Nurkse, Rein. 1937. Adjektiiv-atribuudi kongruentsist eesti keeles [Agreement of adjectival attribute in Estonian]. Tartu: Akadeemiline Emakeele Selts.Google Scholar
Pajusalu, Karl, Hennoste, Tiit, Niit, Ellen, Päll, Peeter & Viikberg, Jüri. 2009. Eesti murded ja kohanimed [Estonian dialects and place names], 2nd edn. Tallinn: Eesti Keele Sihtasutus.Google Scholar
Penjam, Pille. 2006. tulema-verbi grammatilised funktsioonid eesti kirjakeeles [Grammatical functions of the verb tulema in written Estonian]. Keel ja Kirjandus 1, 33–41.Google Scholar
Penjam, Pille. 2011. Eesti kirjakeele subjektilised ja adessiivadverbiaaliga TARVITSEMA-konstruktsioonid [Tarvitsema-constructions with subject or adessive adverbial in written Estonian]. Keel ja Kirjandus 5, 505–525.Google Scholar
Pilvik, Maarja-Liisa. 2016. olema + Vmine konstruktsioonid eesti murretes [On olema + Vmine constructions in Estonian dialects]. Keel ja Kirjandus 6, 429–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pilvik, Maarja-Liisa. 2017. Deverbal -mine action nominals in the Estonian Dialect Corpus. In Lindström, Liina & Huumo, Tuomas (eds.), Grammar in Use: Approaches to Baltic-Finnic: Special issue of Journal of Estonian and Finno-Ugric Linguistics 8 (2), 295–326.Google Scholar
R Development CoreTeam. 2013. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org/.Google Scholar
Ruutma, Mirjam, Kyröläinen, Aki-Juhani, Pilvik, Maarja-Liisa & Uiboaed, Kristel. 2016. Ambipositsioonide morfosüntaktilise varieerumise kirjeldusi kvantitatiivsete profiilide abil [Descriptions of the morphosyntactic variation of ambipositions by means of quantitative profiles]. Keel ja Kirjandus 2, 92–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saareste, Andrus. 1938. Eesti Murdeatlas: Atlas Des Parlers Estoniens [Estonian dialect atlas]. Tartu: Eesti Kirjanduse Selts.Google Scholar
Saareste, Andrus. 1955. Petit Atlas Des Parlers Estoniens: Väike Eesti Murdeatlas [Small Estonian dialect atlas]. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Seržant, Ilja A. 2012. The so-called possessive perfect in North Russian and the Circum-Baltic area: A diachronic and areal account. Lingua 122, 356–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seržant, Ilja A. 2015a. The independent partitive as an Eastern Circum-Baltic isogloss. Journal of Language Contact 8, 341–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seržant, Ilja A. 2015b. Dative experiencer constructions as a Circum-Baltic isogloss. In Arkadiev, Peter, Holvoet, Axel & Wiemer, Björn (eds.), Contemporary Approaches to Baltic Linguistics, 325–348. Berlin & Boston, MA: de Gruyter Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seržant, Ilja A. & Bjarnadóttir, Valgerður. 2014. Verbalization and non-canonical case marking of some irregular verbs in *-ē- in Baltic and Russian. In Judžentis, Artūras, Civjan, Tatyana & Zavyalova, Maria (eds.), Balai ir slavai: dvasinių kultūrų sankritos/ [The Balts and Slavs: Intersections of spiritual cultures], 218–242. Vilnius: Versmės.Google Scholar
Strobl, Carolin, Boulesteix, Anne-Laure, Kneib, Thomas, Augustin, Thomas & Zeileis, Achim. 2008. Conditional variable importance for random forests. BMC Bioinformatics 9 (1), 307.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Strobl, Carolin, Boulesteix, Anne-Laure, Zeileis, Achim & Hothorn, Torsten. 2007. Bias in random forest variable importance measures: Illustrations, sources and a solution. BMC Bioinformatics 8 (1), 25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Strobl, Carolin, Malley, James & Tutz, Gerhard. 2009. An introduction to recursive partitioning: Rationale, application and characteristics of classification and regression trees, bagging and Random Forests. Psychological Methods 14 (4), 323–348.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt. 2013. Grammatical Variation in British English Dialects: A Study in Corpus-based Dialectometry (Studies in English Language). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A. & Baayen, R. Harald. 2012. Models, forests, and trees of York English: Was/were variation as a case study for statistical practice. Language Variation and Change 24 (2), 135–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torn-Leesik, Reeli & Vihman, Virve-Anneli. 2010. The uses of impersonals in spoken Estonian. SKY Journal of Linguistics 23, 301–343.Google Scholar
Uiboaed, Kristel. 2010. Statistilised meetodid murdekorpuse ühendverbide tuvastamisel [Statistical methods for phrasal verb detection in Estonian Dialects]. Eesti Rakenduslingvistika Ühingu Aastaraamat 6, 307–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uiboaed, Kristel. 2013. Verbiühendid eesti murretes [Verb constructions in Estonian dialects]. Tartu: University of Tartu Press.Google Scholar
Uiboaed, Kristel. 2016. Spatial Visualization with R. Spatial-visualization-with-r 1.0. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.51473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uiboaed, Kristel, Hasselblatt, Cornelius, Lindström, Liina, Muischnek, Kadri & Nerbonne, John. 2013. Variation of verbal constructions in Estonian dialects. Literary and Linguistic Computing 28 (1), 42–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vaba, Lembit. 2011. Kuidas läti-eesti keelekontakt on mõjutanud eesti murdekeele grammatikat ja sõnamoodustust [Impact of Latvian–Estonian language contacts of the grammar and word-formation of Estonian dialects]. Emakeele Seltsi aastaraamat 2010 (56), 204–246.Google Scholar
Van de Velde, Hans & van Hout, Roeland. 1998. Dangerous aggregations: A case study of Dutch (n) deletion. In Paradis, Carole (ed.), Papers in Sociolinguistics, 137–147. Quebec: Nuits Blanches.Google Scholar
Vangsnes, Øystein Alexander. 2007. Scandinavian dialect syntax (before and after) 2005. Nordlyd 34 (1), 7–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Velsker, Eva. 2013. Aeg eesti murretes [Aeg ‘time’ in Estonian dialects]. Emakeele Seltsi aastaraamat (2012)58, 265–295.Google Scholar
Viitso, Tiit-Rein. 2014. Constructions of obligation, duty, and necessity in Livonian. Journal of Estonian and Finno-Ugric Linguistics 5 (1), 193–214.Google Scholar
Wade, Terence. 2011. A Comprehensive Russian Grammar, 3rd edn. Revised and updated by David Gillespie. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wälchli, Bernhard. 2011. The Circum-Baltic languages. In Kortmann, Bernd & van der Auwera, Johann (eds.), The Languages and Linguistics of Europe: A Comprehensive Guide, 325–340. Berlin & Boston, MA: de Gruyter Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolk, Christoph, Bresnan, Joan, Rosenbach, Anette & Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt. 2013. Dative and genitive variability in Late Modern English: Exploring cross-constructional variation and change. Diachronica 30 (3), 382–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolk, Christoph & Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt. 2016. Top–down and bottom–up advances in corpus-based dialectometry. In Côté, Marie-Hélène, Knooihuizen, Remco & Nerbonne, John (eds.), The Future of Dialects: Selected Papers from Methods in Dialectology XV (Series: Language Variation 1), 225–243. Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar