Cover not available

In:Cross-linguistic Register Variation
Edited by Sylvi Rørvik and Marlén Izquierdo
[Studies in Corpus Linguistics 125] 2026
► pp. 24–51

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload Book EPUB
authorization required

Chapter 2
A cross-linguistic cross-register study of the verb phrase in English and Norwegian face-to-face conversation and fictional dialogue

ORCiD logo with link | University of Oslo
Published online: 20 February 2026
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.125.02ebe
Abstract
This chapter reports on a contrastive study of English and Norwegian conversation and fictional dialogue, offering insights into formal and semantic characteristics of verb phrases (VPs) from a cross-linguistic and cross-register perspective. Cross-linguistically, fictional dialogue is shown to behave similarly and comes across as a formally more homogenous register than conversation. In terms of semantic features, cross-linguistic differences are prominent in both registers, despite some overlap in process types. The cross-register analysis reveals that authors writing in English and Norwegian do not imitate the formal characteristics of the VP in conversation in their written dialogues. Semantically, authors writing in English produce a more conversational style, while Norwegian authors produce more identifying and action-driven dialogues compared to conversation.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction and aim
  • 2.Background
    • 2.1Two types of dialogue register
    • 1.3Previous studies of conversation vs. fictional dialogue
    • 1.4Previous cross-linguistic cross-register studies
  • 3.Material and method
    • 3.1Corpora
    • 3.2Data extraction and classification
  • 4.Analysis: Formal features of the VP
    • 4.1Type-token ratio
    • 4.2Simple vs. complex VPs
    • 4.3Finiteness
  • 5.Analysis: Semantic features of the VP
    • 5.1Process types
  • 6.Discussion of findings
    • 6.1Cross-linguistic findings
      • 6.1.1A closer look at relational processes in English and Norwegian conversation
    • 6.2Cross-register findings
      • 6.2.1A closer look at TTR
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
  • Appendix
References (40)
References
Aijmer, K., & Lewis, D. (Eds.). (2017). Contrastive analysis of discourse-pragmatic aspects of linguistic genres. Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Anthony, L. (2020). AntConc (3.5.9) [Software]. Waseda University. [URL]
(2022). TagAnt (2.0.5) [Software]. Waseda University. [URL]
Bednarek, M. (2015). Corpus-assisted multimodal discourse analysis of television and film narratives. In P. Baker & T. McEnery (Eds.), Corpora and discourse studies: Integrating discourse and corpora (pp. 63–88). Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D., & Conrad, S. (2019). Registers, genres, and styles (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Longman. Also published as: Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (2021). Grammar of spoken and written English. John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). Discourse analysis. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brumme, J., & Espuyna, A. (2012). Background and justification: Research into fictional orality and its translation. In J. Brumme & A. Espuyna (Eds.), The translation of fictive dialogue (pp. 7–31). Rodopi. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bublitz, W. (2017). Oral features in fiction. In M. A. Locher & A. H. Jucker (Eds.), Pragmatics of fiction (pp. 235–263). De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Čermáková, A., Jantunen, J., Jauhiainen, T., Kirk, J., Křen, M., Kupietz, M., & Uí Dhonnchadha, E. (2021). International Comparable Corpus: Challenges in building multilingual spoken and written comparable corpora. Research in Corpus Linguistics, 9(1), 89–103. [URL].
Chocholoušová, B. (2007). Norwegian det-constructions and their translation correspondences in English and German: A contrastive corpus based study of dummy subjects (Masterʼs Diploma Thesis). Masaryk University.
“conversation”. Merriam-Webster.com. (2024). Retrieved on 9 January 2025 from [URL]
Dupont, M., & Zufferey, S. (2017). Methodological issues in the use of directional parallel corpora. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 22(2), 270–297. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ebeling, J. (2000). Presentative constructions in English and Norwegian. A corpus-based contrastive study (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Oslo.
Ebeling, S. O. (2021). Hope for the future: An analysis of HOPE/HÅP(E) across genres and languages. Bergen Language and Linguistics Studies (BeLLS), 11(1), 7–26. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2024b). Seeing through languages and registers: A closer look at the cognates see and se. In A. Cermakova, H. Hasselgård, M. Malá, & D. Šebestová (Eds.), Contrastive corpus linguistics. Patterns in lexicogrammar and discourse (pp. 29–61). Bloomsbury Academic. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ebeling, S. O., & Ebeling, J. (2020). Dialogue vs. narrative in fiction: A cross-linguistic comparison. Languages in Contrast, 20(2), 288–313. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eliot, T. S. (1931). Charles Whibley: A memoir. The English Association, Pamphlet No. 80.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gundel, J. (2002). Information structure and the use of cleft sentences in English and Norwegian. In H. Hasselgård, S. Johansson, B. Behrens, & C. Fabricius-Hansen (Eds.), Information structure in a cross-linguistic perspective (pp. 113–128). Rodopi. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar. Edward Arnold.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2017). Adverbial clauses in English and Norwegian fiction and news. In K. Aijmer & D. Lewis (Eds.), Contrastive analysis of discourse-pragmatic aspects of linguistic genres (pp. 119–139). Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jucker, A. H. (2021). Features of orality in the language of fiction: A corpus-based investigation. Language and Literature, 30(4), 341–360. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kallen, J. L., & Kirk, J. M. (2008). ICE-Ireland: A user’s guide. Documentation to accompany the Ireland component of the International Corpus of English (ICE-Ireland). Queen’s University Belfast, Trinity College Dublin, and Cló Ollscoil na Banríona. [URL]
Leech, G., & Short, M. (1981). Style in fiction: A linguistic introduction to English fictional prose. Pearson Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2007). Style in fiction: A linguistic introduction to English fictional prose (2nd ed.). Pearson Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Neumann, S. (2014). Contrastive register variation. A quantitative approach to the comparison of English and German. De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nykänen, E., & Koivisto, A. (2016). Introduction: Approaches to fictional dialogue. International Journal of Literary Linguistics, 5(2), Article 1.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Palmer, F. R. (1990). Modality and the English modals (2nd ed.). Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rabadán, R., & Gutiérrez Lanza, C. (2023). English-Spanish fictive dialogue vs prefabricated orality: A study on addressee-oriented conversational markers. Conference presentation at XIV International Conference on Corpus Linguistics. CILC 2023. Corpus Linguistics in the Digital Era: Genres, Registers and Domains, Universidad de Oviedo.
Short, M. (1996). Exploring the language of poems, plays and prose. Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sidnell, J., & Stivers, T. (Eds.). (2012). The handbook of conversation analysis. Wiley. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thomas, B. (2012). Fictional dialogue: Speech and conversation in the modern and postmodern novel. University of Nebraska Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Toolan, M. (1985). Analysing fictional dialogue. Language and Communication, 5(3), 193–206. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tottie, G. (2011). Uh and um as sociolinguistic markers in British English. The International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 16, 173–197. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue