Difference between revisions of "Data-driven Valence Typology"
Lars Hellan (Talk | contribs) |
Lars Hellan (Talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
='''Data-driven Valence Typology'''= | ='''Data-driven Valence Typology'''= | ||
| + | |||
| + | Mary Esther Kropp Dakubu and Lars Hellan | ||
| + | |||
| + | Nov. 7, 2011 | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''Data-driven Valence Typology (DVT)''' is a project where we seek to represent the characteristic sentence construction types of a language – called its c-profile - in a transparent, detailed and non-theory-biased format, drawing from a common restricted repertory of analytic-descriptive primitives (Hellan and Dakubu 2010). By adhering to a common classification system, DVT in principle allows for its data to be searchable in a relational database. DVT has so far been developed with a view to cover significantly different languages (''Ga'' from the Niger-Congo family ''Kwa'', ''Norwegian'' from ''Germanic'', and ''Kistaninya'' from ''Ethio-Semitic''), while in a current phase the project has a more ‘micro-comparative’ focus, in showing how a profile for one language of a given family can be derived from the c-profile of another language in the same family. In Germanic we envisage such extensions with regard ''English'' and ''German'', and in Kwa/Gur with regard to ''Dangme'' and ''Gurene''. | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | In situating DVT among current projects and initiatives, it can perhaps be most directly related to ''VerbNet'', its non-computational predecessor ''Levin (1993)'', and the cross-linguistic development of the latter, the ''Leipzig Valency Project''. In future publications we will show how an inventory of verb classes in the Levin approach can be derived from a DVT c-profile and an accompanying verb construction lexicon, as are available for Ga (Dakubu 2011), and for Norwegian (Hellan 2011). We will also assess the notion of ‘valence alternation’ as a comparison unit, by itself notoriously difficult to define, and show that for the 150 most salient frames in Ga, none of them are interconnected by any of the ‘alternation’ patterns which are commonly applied in the European setting. We will advocate DVT as offering a sounder general basis for valence typology, not being directly dependent on notions like 'alternation'. | ||
| + | |||
| + | References: | ||
| + | Dakubu 2011 Ga Verbs and their Constructions | ||
| + | Hellan 2011 | ||
| + | Hellan and Dakubu 2010 | ||
| + | Levin 1993 | ||
| + | |||
| + | Websites: | ||
| + | DVT | ||
| + | Leipzig Valency Project | ||
| + | Verbnet | ||
Revision as of 11:18, 7 November 2011
Data-driven Valence Typology
Mary Esther Kropp Dakubu and Lars Hellan
Nov. 7, 2011
Data-driven Valence Typology (DVT) is a project where we seek to represent the characteristic sentence construction types of a language – called its c-profile - in a transparent, detailed and non-theory-biased format, drawing from a common restricted repertory of analytic-descriptive primitives (Hellan and Dakubu 2010). By adhering to a common classification system, DVT in principle allows for its data to be searchable in a relational database. DVT has so far been developed with a view to cover significantly different languages (Ga from the Niger-Congo family Kwa, Norwegian from Germanic, and Kistaninya from Ethio-Semitic), while in a current phase the project has a more ‘micro-comparative’ focus, in showing how a profile for one language of a given family can be derived from the c-profile of another language in the same family. In Germanic we envisage such extensions with regard English and German, and in Kwa/Gur with regard to Dangme and Gurene.
In situating DVT among current projects and initiatives, it can perhaps be most directly related to VerbNet, its non-computational predecessor Levin (1993), and the cross-linguistic development of the latter, the Leipzig Valency Project. In future publications we will show how an inventory of verb classes in the Levin approach can be derived from a DVT c-profile and an accompanying verb construction lexicon, as are available for Ga (Dakubu 2011), and for Norwegian (Hellan 2011). We will also assess the notion of ‘valence alternation’ as a comparison unit, by itself notoriously difficult to define, and show that for the 150 most salient frames in Ga, none of them are interconnected by any of the ‘alternation’ patterns which are commonly applied in the European setting. We will advocate DVT as offering a sounder general basis for valence typology, not being directly dependent on notions like 'alternation'.
References: Dakubu 2011 Ga Verbs and their Constructions Hellan 2011 Hellan and Dakubu 2010 Levin 1993
Websites: DVT Leipzig Valency Project Verbnet