With or without articles? A comparison of article-like determiners in Estonian and Finnish
Abstract
In this paper, we compare the use and functions of definite and indefinite article-like determiners in Estonian and Finnish. Our main aim is to explore whether the factors that explain the choice of particular determiner forms are similar in Estonian and Finnish. We use a picture-sequence based elicitation experiment to collect spoken narratives from adult native speakers of Estonian and Finnish, and apply non-parametric tree and forest models to analyze the data. Our findings indicate that number of mention and animacy are important predictor variables in both languages, but their exact effect is divergent. We also find that in Finnish, case of the determiner NP proves to be an important factor, while in Estonian, syntactic role of the NP explains some aspects of determiner form choice. Nevertheless, the overall usage frequency of determiners is modest in the Estonian and Finnish data, and the process of grammaticalizing articles is only in initial stages in both languages.
***
Artikliga, artiklita? Eesti ja soome keele artiklilaadsete määratlejate võrdlus
Siinses uurimuses analüüsime võrdlevalt artiklilaadseid definiitseid ja indefiniitseid määratlejaid eesti ja soome keeles. Eelkõige kõrvutame eesti keele definiitset määratlejat see ja soome keele definiitseid määratlejaid se ja tämä ning eesti ja soome indefiniitset määratlejat üks/yks(i). Samuti vaatleme eesti keele possessiivpronoomeni oma ning soome 3sg possessiivsufiksi (-nsa/-nsä, -Vn) referentsiaalseid omadusi. Uurimuse põhieesmärgiks on selgitada, millised on peamised määratlejate kasutust mõjutavad keelelised faktorid eesti ja soome keeles ning kas need faktorid on keeliti sarnased või erinevad. Ühtlasi otsime vastust küsimusele, kas eesti ja soome keeles on põhjust rääkida määratlejate grammatisatsioonist artikliteks.
Uuritav keelematerjal pärineb pildiseeria põhjal kogutud suulistest narratiividest. Uurimuses osales 20 eesti ja 20 soome keele emakeelset kõnelejat. Narratiivides esinevate viitavate määratlejaga ja määratlejata nimisõnafraaside (NP) analüüsiks rakendasime multifaktoriaalset analüüsi (tingimuslikke rekursiivseid otsustuspuid ja tingimuslikke juhumetsasid).
Analüüsi tulemusel selgus, et ehkki määratlejate kasutust mõjutavad tegurid on eesti ja soome keeles kohati sarnased, esineb ka märkimisväärseid erinevusi. Näiteks eristuvad mõlemas keeles selgelt esmamainitud referentidele viitavad (seega indefiniitsed) NP-d korduvalt mainitud referentidele viitavatest (seega definiitsetest) NP-dest. Ka referendi elusus on mõlemas keeles määratleja valikut mõjutav faktor, kuid selle faktori mõju on erinev. Kui eesti keeles on referendi elusus oluliseks faktoriks esimesel mainimiskorral (üksNP viitab pigem elusale referendile), siis soome keeles ilmneb tendents, et elusus määrab hoopis määratlejate valikut hilisematel mainimiskordadel (seNP viitab pigem elututele ja tämäNP pigem elusatele referentidele). Analüüsist selgus ka, et eesti keeles sõltub määratleja see valik süntaktilisest rollist, nimelt mainitakse seeNP-dega eelkõige subjekte ja objekte. Soome keeles seevastu on oluline kääne: omaette rühma moodustavad NP-d ablatiivi või elatiivi käändes, milles esineb sageli määratlejatena lokatiivne adverbiaal.
Ehkki eesti ja soome keele määratlejate kasutus ei ole juhuslik, esinevad määratlejaga NP-d meie materjalis siiski oluliselt harvemini kui määratlejata NP-d. Seega on määratlejate grammatiseerumine artiklites eesti ja soome keeles veel algstaadiumis ning definiitsuse avaldub nii eesti kui soome keeles veel selgelt pragmaatilise, mitte grammatilise kategooriana.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Ariel, Mira 1990. Accessing Noun-Phrase Antecedents. London: Routledge.
Baayen, R. Harald, Anna Endresen, Laura A. Janda, Anastasia Makarova, Tore Nesset 2013. Making choices in Russian: Pros and cons of statistical methods for rival forms. – Russian Linguistics 37 (3), 253–291. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11185-013-9118-6
Barker, Chris 2000. Definite possessives and discourse novelty. – Theoretical Linguistics 26 (3), 211–227. https://doi.org/10.1515/thli.2000.26.3.211
Belaj, Branimir, Darko Matovac 2015. On the article-like use of the indefinite determiners jedan and neki in Croatian and other Slavic languages. – Suvremena Lingvistika 41 (79), 1–20. http://hrcak.srce.hr/141781
Breiman, Leo 2001. Random forests. – Machine Learning 45 (1), 5–32. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010933404324
Chafe, Wallace (Ed.) 1980. The Pear Stories: Cognitive, Cultural, and Linguistic Aspects of Narrative Production. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Chesterman, Andrew 1991. On Definiteness. A Study with Special Reference to English and Finnish. Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 56. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511519710
Diessel, Holger 1999. Demonstratives: Form, Function, and Grammaticalization. Typological Studies in Language 42. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.42
Dryer, Matthew S. 1989. Article-noun order. – Papers from the Regional Meetings of the Chicago Linguistic Society 25, 83–97.
Dryer, Matthew S. 2013a. Indefinite articles. – Matthew S. Dryer, Martin Haspelmath (Eds.), The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/38
Dryer, Matthew S. 2013b. Definite Articles. – Matthew S. Dryer, Martin Haspelmath (Eds.), The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/37
EKG II = Erelt, Mati, Reet Kasik, Helle Metslang, Henno Rajandi, Kristiina Ross, Henn Saari, Kaja Tael, Silvi Vare 1993. Eesti keele grammatika II. Süntaks [‘The Grammar of the Estonian Language II: Syntax’]. Eesti Teaduste Akadeemia Keele ja Kirjanduse Instituut. Tallinn.
Etelämäki, Marja 2006 Toiminta ja tarkoite: tutkimus suomen pronominista tämä [‘Use and meaning of the Finnish demonstrative pronoun ‘this’]. Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seuran toimituksia 1008. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.
Gerland, Doris 2014. Definitely not possessed? Possessive suffixes with definiteness marking function. – Thomas Gamerschlag, Doris Gerland, Rainer Osswald, Wiebke Petersen (Eds.), Frames and Concept Types: Applications in Language and Philosophy. Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy 94. Cham-Heidelberg: Springer International Publishing Switzerland, 269–292.
Givón, Talmy 1981. On the development of the numeral ‘one’ as an indefinite marker. – Folia Linguistica Historica 2 (1), 35–53. https://doi.org/10.1515/flih.1981.2.1.35
Givón, Talmy 1983. Introduction. – Talmy Givón (Ed.), Topic Continuity in Discourse: A quantitative cross-language study. Typological Studies in Language 3. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 1–41. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.3.01giv
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1978. How does a language acquire gender markers? – Joseph H. Greenberg (Ed.), Universals of Human Language 3. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 47–82.
Gundel, Jeanette K., Nancy Hedberg, Ron Zacharski 1993. Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. – Language 69 (2), 274–307. https://doi.org/10.2307/416535
Haspelmath, Martin 1998. How young is standard average european? – Language Sciences 20 (3), 271–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0388-0001(98)00004-7
Heine, Bernd, Tania Kuteva 2006. The Changing Languages of Europe. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199297337.001.0001
Heine, Bernd, Ulrike Claudi, Friederike Hünnemeyer 1991. Grammaticalization: A Conceptual Framework. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. 1996. Demonstratives in narrative discourse: A taxonomy of universal uses. – Barbara A. Fox (Ed.), Studies in Anaphora. Typological Studies in Language 33. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 205–254. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.33.08him
Hothorn, Torsten, Kurt Hornik, Achim Zeileis 2006. Unbiased recursive partitioning: A conditional inference framework. – Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics 15 (3), 651–674. https://doi.org/10.1198/106186006X133933
Janda, Laura A. 2013. Quantitative methods in cognitive linguistics: An introduction. – Laura A. Janda (Ed.), Cognitive Linguistics: The Quantitative Turn. The Essential Reader. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, 1–32.
Juvonen, Päivi 2000. Grammaticalizing the Definite Article. A Study of Definite Adnominal Determiners in a Genre of Spoken Finnish. Stockholm: Stockholm University, Department of Linguistics.
Juvonen, Päivi 2005. On the pragmatics of indefinite determiners in spoken Finnish. – Ritva Laury (Ed.), Minimal Reference. The use of pronouns in Finnish and Estonian Discourse. Studia Fennica Linguistica 12. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society, 190–211.
Keevallik, Leelo 2010. The interactional profile of a placeholder: the Estonian demonstrative see. –Nino Amiridze, Boyd H. Davis, Margaret Maclagan (Eds.), Fillers, Pauses, and Placeholders. Typological Studies in Language 93. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 139–172. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/tsl.93.07kee
Koster, Charlotte, John Hoeks, Petra Hendriks 2011. Comprehension and production of subject pronouns in child Dutch. – Angela Grimm, Anja Müller, Cornelia Hamann, Esther Ruigendijk (Eds.), Production-Comprehension Asymmetries in Child Language. Studies on Language Acquisition 43. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, 99–122.
Larjavaara, Matti 2001. Määräinen artikkeli – suomessa? – Kielikello 4, 25–27. http://www.kielikello.fi/index.php?mid=2&pid=11&aid=1298
Laury, Ritva 1997. Demonstratives in Interaction: The Emergence of a Definite Article in Finnish. Studies in Discourse and Grammar 7. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/sidag.7
Laury, Ritva 2001a. Definiteness and Reflexivity. – Pragmatics 11 (4), 401–420. https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.11.4.03lau
Laury, Ritva 2001b. Definiteness. – Jef Verschueren, Jan-Ola Östman, Jan Blommaert, Chris Bulcaen (Eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics: 1999 Installment. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Lindström, Liina, Virve-Anneli Vihman 2017. Who needs it ? Variation in experiencer marking in Estonian ‘need’-constructions. – Journal of Linguistics 54, 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226716000402
Lyons, Christopher 1999. Definiteness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511605789
Nordlund, Taru, Ritva Laury, Renate Pajusalu, Külli Habicht 2013. Kielikontaktit, kieliopillistuminen ja kieltenvälinen vertailu. – Leena Kolehmainen, Matti Miestamo, Taru Nordlund (Eds.), Kielet toistensa peilissä. Kielten vertailu tutkimusmenetelmänä. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura, 251–290.
Pajusalu, Renate 1997. Is there an article in (spoken) Estonian? – Mati Erelt (Ed.), Estonian: Typological Studies II. Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli eesti keele õppetool, 146–177.
Pajusalu, Renate 2000. Indefinite determiners mingi and üks in Estonian. – Mati Erelt (Ed.), Estonian: Typological Studies IV. Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus, 87–117.
Pajusalu, Renate 2006. Death of a demonstrative: person and time. The case of Estonian too. – Linguistica Uralica XLII (4), 241–253.
Pajusalu, Renate 2009. Pronouns and reference in Estonian. – Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 62 (1/2), 122–139. https://doi.org/10.1524/stuf.2009.0008
Priiki, Katri 2017. Hän, se, tää vai toi? Vuorovaikutussosiolingvistinen tutkimus henkilöviittauksista Kaakkois-Satakunnan nykypuhekielessä [‘An interactional sociolinguistic study of third-person references to people in contemporary spoken Finnish in southwestern Satakunta’]. University of Turku, Faculty of Humanities.
R Core Team 2016. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.r-project.org/
Reile, Maria 2015. Space and demonstratives: An experiment with Estonian exophoric demonstratives. – Journal of Estonian and Finno-Ugric Linguistics 6 (2), 137–166. https://doi.org/10.12697/jeful.2015.6.2.06
Schroeder, Christoph 2006. Articles and article systems in some areas of Europe. – Giuliano Bernini, Marcia L. Schwartz (Eds.), Pragmatic Organization of Discourse in the Languages of Europe. Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 20-8. Berlin, New York: Mouton De Gruyter, 545–612.
Seppänen, Eeva-Leena 1998. Läsnäolon pronominit: tämä, tuo, se ja hän viittaamassa keskustelun osallistujaan. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.
Siewierska, Anna 2004. Person. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511812729
Strobl, Carolin, Anne-Laure Boulesteix, Thomas Kneib, Thomas Augustin, Achim Zeileis 2008. Conditional variable importance for random forests. – BMC Bioinformatics 9, 307. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-9-307
Strobl, Carolin, James Malley, Gerhard Tutz 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. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016973
Tagliamonte, Sali A., R. Harald Baayen 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. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394512000129
Taremaa, Piia 2017. Attention meets language: A corpus study on the expression of motion in Estonian. Dissertationes Linguisticae Universitatis Tartuensis 29. Tartu: University of Tartu Press.
Varteva, Annukka 1998. Pronominit hän ja tämä tekstissä [‘Pronouns hän ‘he/she’ and täma ‘these’ in texts’]. – Viirittäjä 102 (2), 202–221.
Weiss, Daniel 2004. The rise of an indefinite article: The case of Macedonian eden. – Walter Bisang, Nikolaus P. Himmelmann, Björn Wiemer (Eds.), What Makes Grammaticalization? A Look From its Fringes and its Components. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 139–168.
Vilkuna, Maria 1992. Referenssi ja määräisyys suomenkielisten tekstien tulkinnassa. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.
VISK = Hakulinen, Auli, Maria Vilkuna, Riitta Korhonen, Vesa Koivisto, Tarja Riitta Heinonen, Irja Alho 2008. Iso suomen kielioppi. Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seuran toimituksia 950. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura. http://scripta.kotus.fi/visk/etusivu.php
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5128/LV27.02
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2017 Helen Hint, Tiina Nahkola, Renate Pajusalu
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
ISSN 1736-9290 (print)
ISSN 2228-3854 (online)
DOI https://doi.org/10.5128/LV.1736-9290