PhD thesis - School of Informatics - University of Edinburgh

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Chapter 2. Background and Theory 9 The number of internet users has increased nearly 71-fold from an estimated 16 million in December 1995 to 1,133 million in June 2007. 2 While the overall presence of English on the Web has declined during that time period, Figure 2.1 clearly shows that the internet is still English-dominated. The preponderance of English on the Web results in virtual language contact and concomitantly in language mixing. Two extensively studied phenomena that are the results of this type of language mixing are language borrowing and code-switching which are discussed next. 2.1.1 Borrowing versus Code-switching Both borrowing and code-switching are language contact phenomena that are defined and delineated by many linguists (e.g. Sankoff and Poplack, 1984; McClure and McClure, 1988; Myers-Scotton, 1993; Poplack, 1993; Gardner-Chloros, 1995; King, 2000; Muysken, 2000; Callahan, 2004; Onysko, 2007, to name but a few). While some of them make a clear distinction between both phenomena based on certain criteria, others use the term code-mixing to include any type of language mixing as it is not always clear where borrowing stops and code-switching begins. The criteria that are used to classify foreign inclusions as either borrowings or code-switches are: the number of lexical units, morpho-syntactic integration into the receiver language, and usage frequency. According to these three criteria, the majority of linguists define borrowings as single lexical units from a source language that can be structurally and sometimes phonologically modified when embedded into the receiver language. There is also a tendency to regard foreign expressions as borrowings if they are fre- quently used (e.g. Sankoff and Poplack, 1984; Myers-Scotton, 1993; Muysken, 2000). Proper nouns, including names of organisations, companies and brands can generally be classified as borrowings. Conversely, code-switches are defined as multi-word units from a source language that retain their structure and pronunciation when embedded in the receiver language (e.g. Onysko, 2006). Regarded as distinct from the surrounding text, Myers-Scotton (1993) appropriately calls them “embedded language islands”. In terms of their usage frequency, code-switches are often thought of as single occurrences of foreign elements. Typically, code-switching is regarded as a symptom of bi- and multilingual 2 Statistics taken from All About Market Research on June 13, 2007: http://www. allaboutmarketresearch.com/internet.htm
Chapter 2. Background and Theory 10 speakers in diverse discourse situations. However, Onysko (2006) argues that code- switching in written language, yet less extensively investigated, is a phenomenon that does exist. Code-switching includes English phrasal and clausal segments occurring, for example, in the German text as a result of English developing into a global means of communication and its increasing impact on German. One justification for this theory is the high degree of latent bilingualism among German native speakers. The author of a written piece of text primarily acts as a mediator of the code-switch with the aim to induce a receptive code-switch in the reader. While code-switching involves the insertion of foreign elements into the receiver language, borrowing leads to the foreign element being entered into the receiver language speaker’s lexicon (Muysken, 2000). However, this well-defined differentiation can be problematic as certain foreign inclusions are difficult to classify according to these criteria. Onysko (2006) points out that the definitions do not account for single- word code-switches and multi-word borrowings both of which occur. He lists exam- ples of English inclusions found in German newspaper text such as trial and error or Books on Demand which, although multi-word English inclusions, appear as lexical elements in the text and therefore follow the notion of borrowings. Moreover, Callahan (2004) suggests that foreign, single-word company and brand names could be regarded as code-switches as they are not subject to structural or phonological adaptation. Dif- ferentiating between borrowing and code-switching in spoken language can also be ambiguous if the pronunciation of the foreign inclusion is imperfect (Poplack, 1988). It can therefore be concluded that there is no clear-cut distinction between language borrowing and code-switching. In fact, some linguists prefer to define both related manifestations of language contact as a continuum ranging from borrowing to code-switching with non-canonical cases in between (e.g. Boyd, 1993; Clyne, 1993). A differentiation is often dependent on the given situation of language contact. Onysko (2006), for example, carried out a corpus analysis investigating the occurrence of En- glish inclusions in German newspaper text. He found that, with some exceptions, the majority of inclusions account for either borrowings, single-word inclusions that largely follow the morpho-syntactic conventions of German, or code-switching, multi- word inclusions governed by English syntactic rules. The impact of English on Ger- man, French and other languages, particularly in written language, is examined in more detail in the following sections.
Page 1 and 2: Automatic Detection of English Incl
Page 3 and 4: these parsers with the annotation-f
Page 5 and 6: Declaration I declare that this the
Page 7 and 8: 3.3.5 Post-processing Module . . .
Page 9 and 10: A.2.2 Kappa Coefficient . . . . . .
Page 11 and 12: 5.6 Average relative token frequenc
Page 13 and 14: 3.16 Most frequent English inclusio
Page 15 and 16: Chapter 1. Introduction 2 siderable
Page 17 and 18: Chapter 1. Introduction 4 Chapter 3
Page 19 and 20: Chapter 1. Introduction 6 1.1 Relat
Page 21: Chapter 2. Background and Theory 8
Page 25 and 26: Chapter 2. Background and Theory 12
Page 59 and 60: Chapter 3 Tracking English Inclusio
Page 61 and 62: Chapter 3. Tracking English Inclusi
Page 73 and 74:
Chapter 3. Tracking English Inclusi
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Chapter 4 System Extension to a New
Page 115 and 116:
Chapter 4. System Extension to a Ne
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Chapter 5 Parsing English Inclusion
Page 131 and 132:
Chapter 5. Parsing English Inclusio
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Chapter 6 Other Potential Applicati
Page 161 and 162:
Chapter 6. Other Potential Applicat
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Chapter 7 Conclusions and Future Wo
Page 189 and 190:
Chapter 7. Conclusions and Future W
Page 191 and 192:
Appendix A. Evaluation Metrics and
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Appendix B. Guidelines for Annotati
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Appendix C TIGER Tags and Labels C.
Page 207 and 208:
Appendix C. TIGER Tags and Labels 1
Page 209 and 210:
Appendix C. TIGER Tags and Labels 1
Page 211 and 212:
Bibliography 198 Andersen, G. (2005
Page 213 and 214:
Bibliography 200 Bresnan, J. (2001)
Page 215 and 216:
Bibliography 202 Damashek, M. (1995
Page 217 and 218:
Bibliography 204 Finkel, J., Dingar
Page 219 and 220:
Bibliography 206 Hachey, B., Alex,
Page 221 and 222:
Bibliography 208 Kirkness, A. (1984
Page 223 and 224:
Bibliography 210 and Technology (In
Page 225 and 226:
Bibliography 212 Poplack, S. (1988)
Page 227 and 228:
Bibliography 214 Sokol, D. K. (2000
Page 229:
Bibliography 216 Yang, W. (1990). A
show all

PhD thesis - School of Informatics - University of Edinburgh

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?