In:Tense and Aspect in Second Language Acquisition and Learner Corpus Research
Edited by Robert Fuchs and Valentin Werner
[Benjamins Current Topics 108] 2020
► pp. 83–110
Progressive or not progressive?
Modeling the constructional choices of EFL and ESL writers
Published online: 1 July 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.108.ijlcr.16019.rau
https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.108.ijlcr.16019.rau
Abstract
This multifactorial analysis of progressive marking contrasts native English to two Asian Englishes and Dutch English.
Specifically, we (i) model writers’ constructional choices (progressive vs. non-progressive) across Englishes based on several
linguistic predictors simultaneously, (ii) assess how those factors impact the progressive vs. non-progressive alternation, (iii)
how several linguistic factors determine, simultaneously, writers’ constructional choices and (iv) how those choices differ across
varieties and genres. Based on 4,661 verb constructions from five comparable multi-genre corpora, we ran a logistic regression
analysis to determine which factors cause English-speaking populations to differ in their constructional choices and in which
specific contexts. While the model strongly predicts speakers’ choices, within individual genres, tense and modality are found to
influence speakers’ choices differently. Overall, our results yield nuanced insights into the (dis)similarities among and within
ESL/EFL varieties and contribute to the broader issue of the native-foreign-second language continuum across genres.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.The progressive in the ENL-ESL-EFL continuum: Previous research
- 3.Progressive marking as a multifactorial phenomenon: Some theoretical and methodological insights
- 4.Data and statistical approach
- 4.1Corpora and extraction of data
- 4.2Factors
- 4.3Statistical modeling
- 5.Results
- 5.1Main effect: Semantic domain
- 5.2Interactions
- 5.2.1Interactions with genre
- 5.2.2Constructional choices in the ENL-ESL-EFL continuum
- 6.Discussion
Notes References Appendix
References (50)
Andersen, R. W. & Shirai, Y. (1994). Discourse motivations for some cognitive acquisition principles. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 133–156.
Anthony, L. (2014). AntConc (Version 3.2.4) [Computer software]. Retrieved from [URL]
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2000). Tense and aspect in Second Language Acquisition. Form, meaning, and use. Oxford: Blackwell.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman Grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow: Longman.
Binnick, R. I. (1991). Time and the verb. A guide to tense and aspect. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Brinton, L. J. (1988). The development of English aspectual systems. Aspectualizers and post-verbal particles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Collins, P. (2008). The progressive aspect in World Englishes: A corpus-based study. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 28(2), 225–249.
Davies, M. & Fuchs, R. (2015). Expanding horizons in the study of World Englishes with the 1.9 billion word Global Web-based English Corpus (GloWbE). English World-Wide, 36(1), 1–28.
Deshors, S. C. (2017). Zooming in on verbs in the progressive: A collostructional and correspondence analysis approach. Journal of English Linguistics, 45(3), 260–290.
Dose-Heidelmayer, S. & Götz, S. (2016). The progressive in spoken learner language: A corpus-based analysis of use and misuse. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 54(3), 229–256.
Dowty, D. R. (1979). Word meaning and Montague grammar. The semantics of verbs and times in Generative Semantics and in Montague’s PTQ. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Edwards, A. (2014). The progressive aspect in the Netherlands and the ESL/EFL continuum. World Englishes, 33(2), 173–194.
Ellis, N. C. & Ferreira-Junior, F. (2009). Constructions and their acquisitions. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 7, 187–220.
Fuchs, R. & Gut, U. (2015). An apparent time study of the progressive in Nigerian English. In P. Collins (Ed.), Grammatical change in English world-wide (pp. 373–387). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Gilquin, G. & Granger, S. (2011). From EFL to ESL: Evidence from the International Corpus of Learner English. In J. Mukherjee & M. Hundt (Eds.), Exploring second-language varieties of English and learner Englishes. Bridging a paradigm gap (pp. 55–78). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Goldberg, A. (2006). Constructions at work. The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Greenbaum, S. (1991). The development of the International Corpus of English
. In K. Aijmer, B. Altenberg, & J. Svartvik (Eds.), English corpus linguistics. Studies in honour of Jan Svartvik (pp. 83–91). London: Longman.
Gries, S. Th. (2009). Statistics for linguists with R. A practical introduction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Gut, U. & Fuchs, R. (2013). Progressive aspect in Nigerian English. Journal of English Linguistics, 41(3), 243–267.
Harrell, F. E. (2001). Regression modeling strategies. With applications to linear models, logistic regression, and survival analysis. New York: Springer.
Housen, A. (2002). The acquisition of tense-aspect in English as a second language and the variable influence of inherent aspect. In R. Salaberry & Y. Shirai (Eds.), The L2 acquisition of tense-aspect morphology (pp. 155–197). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hundt, M. & Vogel, K. (2011). Overuse of the progressive in ESL and learner Englishes – fact or fiction? In J. Mukherjee & M. Hundt (Eds.), Exploring second-language varieties of English and learner Englishes. Bridging a paradigm gap (pp. 145–165). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hundt, M., Rautionaho, P., & Strobl, C. (2020). Progressive or simple? A corpus-based study of aspect in World Englishes. Corpora. 15(1), 77–106.
Jenkins, J. (2009). English as a lingua franca. Interpretations and attitudes. World Englishes, 28(2), 200–207.
Kranich, S. (2010). Progressive in modern English. A corpus-based study of grammaticalization and related changes. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Lee, S. -A. (2015). Aktionsart, progressive aspect and underspecification. Linguistic Research, 32(1), 151–193.
Leech, G., Hundt, M., Mair, C., & Smith, N. (2009). Change in contemporary English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Levin, B. (1993). English verb classes and alternations. A preliminary investigation. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Mair, C. & Hundt, M. (1995). Why is the progressive becoming more frequent in English: A corpus-based investigation of language change in progress. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik, 2, 111–122.
Meriläinen, L., Paulasto, H., & Rautionaho, P. (2017). Extended uses of the progressive form in Inner, Outer and Expanding Circle Englishes. In M. Filppula, J. Klemola, A. Mauranen, & S. Vetchinnikova (Eds.), Changing English. Global and local perspectives (pp. 191–216). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Mukherjee, J. & Hundt, M. (Eds.). (2011). Exploring second-language varieties of English and learner Englishes. Bridging a paradigm gap. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Muñoz, C. & Gilabert, R. (2011). More evidence concerning the Aspect Hypothesis: The acquisition of English progressive aspect by Catalan-Spanish instructed learners. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 49, 241–263.
Paulasto, H. (2014). Extended uses of the progressive in L1 and L2 Englishes. English World-Wide, 35(3), 247–276.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.
Rautionaho, P. (2014). Variation in the progressive. A corpus-based study into World Englishes. Tampere: Tampere University Press.
Rohdenburg, G. (2003). Cognitive complexity and horror aequi as factors determining the use of interrogative clause linkers in English. In G. Rohdenburg & B. Mondorf (Eds.), Determinants of grammatical variation in English (pp. 205–249). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
van Rooy, B. (2006). The extension of the progressive aspect in Black South African English. World Englishes, 25(1), 37–64.
(2014). Progressive aspect and stative verbs in Outer Circle varieties. World Englishes, 33(2), 157–172.
Salles Bernal, S. (2015). Synchronic analysis of the progressive aspect in three varieties of Asian Englishes. Miscelánea: A Journal of English and American Studies, 51, 87–107.
Schilk, M. & Hammel, M. (2014). The progressive in South Asian and Southeast Asian varieties of English: Mapping areal homogeneity and heterogeneity. In L. Vandelanotte, K. Davidse, & C. Gentens (Eds.), (pp. 147–171). Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Schneider, G. & Hundt, M. (2012). “Off with their heads”: Profiling TAM in ICE corpora. In M. Hundt & U. Gut (Eds.), Mapping unity and diversity world-wide. Corpus-based studies of New Englishes (pp. 1–34). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Schneider, E. W. (2007). Postcolonial English. Varieties around the world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sharma, D. (2009). Typological diversity in New Englishes. English World-Wide, 30(2), 170–195.
Shirai, Y. & Andersen, R. W. (1995). The acquisition of tense-aspect morphology: A prototype account. Language, 71(4), 743–762.
Smitterberg, E. (2005). The progressive in 19th-century English. A process of integration. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
