Cover not available
Article published In:
Languages in Contrast
Vol. 19:1 (2019) ► pp.48–78

Variable article use with acronyms and initialisms

A contrastive analysis of English, German and Italian

| University of Zurich (Switzerland)
| University of Zurich (Switzerland)
| University of Zurich (Switzerland)
| University of Zurich (Switzerland)
Shortening is a common type of word-formation in many languages. Crystal (2008) distinguishes two kinds of abbreviation: initialisms and acronyms. Article use in English is variable with both acronyms and initialisms used as proper names (e.g. (the) UKIP, at the UN vs. at MIT). The question is whether variability is largely dependent on the semantics of the underlying full form (i.e. whether this is derived from a proper name or common noun) or whether the two types of abbreviation show different behaviour with respect to variable article use. This paper uses data from CoStEP, a new, word-aligned version of EuroParl, and a data-driven approach to investigate variable article use with abbreviations and their full forms uttered by English native speakers and compares the findings to data from parallel German and Italian corpora. The results show higher article variability in English and a marked preference for and near categorical article use in German and Italian. Furthermore, our evidence confirms that acronyms tend towards the proper name end of the cline, while initialisms behave syntactically more like common nouns.
Keywords: article omission, contrastive linguistics, proper name vs. common noun, abbreviations, acronym vs. initialism, English/German/Italian
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background
    • 2.1Acronyms vs. initialisms
    • 2.2Noun types and article use
    • 2.3Previous research
    • 2.4Hypotheses
  • 3.Data and methodology
    • 3.1The corpus: CoStEP
    • 3.2Data retrieval
    • 3.3Data annotation
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Article distribution
    • 4.2Multivariate regression analysis
    • 4.3Variable article use: initialisms vs. acronyms
    • 4.4Article variability from a lexical perspective
    • 4.5Article variability: semantics of full form as a factor
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgement
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 28 May 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.16021.cal
References (36)
References
Accademia della Crusca Online. 2011. Sulla Locuzione a livello di. Available at [URL] [last access on 18 October 2016]
Biber, D., S. Johansson, G. Leech, S. Conrad, and E. Finegan. 1999. The Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Beccaria, G. L. 1994. Dizionario di Linguistica e di Filologia, Metrica, Retorica. Vol. 2801. Torino: Einaudi.Google Scholar
Brief Glossary of European Union Abbreviations. Available at [URL] [last accessed on 20 October 2015]
Cannon, G. 1989. Abbreviations and Acronyms in English Word-formation. American Speech 64(2): 99–127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chesterman, A. 1991. On Definiteness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clematide, S., J. Graën, M. Volk. 2016. Multilingwis – A Multilingual Search Tool for Multi-Word Units in Multiparallel Corpora. In Corpas Pastor, Gloria. Computerised and Corpus-based Approaches to Phraseology: Monolingual and Multilingual Perspectives/Fraseología Computacional y Basada en Corpus: Perspectivas Monolingües y Multilingües. Geneva: Tradulex.Google Scholar
Crystal, D. 2008. A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. Sixth Edition. Victoria: Blackwell Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Duden Online. 2017. Die Verteilung der Artikel (Genusangabe) im Rechtschreibduden. Available at [URL] [last accessed on 28 June 2017]
. 2017. Abkürzungen, Kurzwörter und genormte Kürzel. Available at [URL] [last accessed 28 June 2017]
Engel, U. 2004. Deutsche Grammatik – Neubearbeitung. München: Iudicum.Google Scholar
European Parliament debates’ videos. Available at [URL] [accessed on 23 March 2016]
Graën, J., D. Batinic, and M. Volk. 2014. Cleaning the Europarl Corpus for Linguistic Applications. In Konvens 2014, Hildesheim, 8–10 October 2014.Google Scholar
Harley, H. 2004. Why is it the CIA but not* the NASA? Acronyms, Initialisms, and Definite Descriptions. American Speech, 79(4): 368–399. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huddleston, R. and G. K. Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hundt, M. 2016. Who is the/a/ø Professor at Your University? A Construction-grammar View on Changing Article Use with Single Role Predicates in American English. In M. J. López-Couso, B. Méndez-Naya, P. Núñez-Pertejo & I. M. Palacios-Martínez (eds.) Corpus Linguistics on the Move: Exploring and Understanding English Through Corpora, pp. 227–258. Amsterdam & New York: Brill/Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(in press). Variable Article Usage with Institutional Nouns – an ‘Oddment’ of English?
Koehn, P. 2005. Europarl: A Parallel Corpus for Statistical Machine Translation. In MT Summit 51: 9–86.Google Scholar
Korzen, I. 1996. L’articolo Italiano fra Concetto ed Entità: Considerazioni Preliminari; Il Sintagma Nominale senza Determinante. Vol. 361. Museum Tusculanum Press.Google Scholar
Krámský, J. 1972. The Article and the Concept of Definiteness in Language. The Hague: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lyons, C. 1999. Definiteness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McCully, C. B. and M. Holmes. 1988. Some Notes on the Structure of Acronyms. Lingua 74(1): 27–43. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Platt, J. T. 1974. Alphabet Soups or a Mess of Pottage?. Foundations of Language 11(2): 295–297.Google Scholar
Quirk, R., S. Greenbaum, G. Leech, J. Svartvik, and D. Crystal. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Ross, J. R. 1972. Alphabet Soups and Name-calling. Foundations of Language 9(1): 113.Google Scholar
Rowlinson, W. 1994. German Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Teich, E. 2003. Cross-Linguistic Variation in System and Text. A Methodology for the Investigation of Translations and Comparable Texts. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tse, G. Y. W. 2001. The Grammatical Factors Influencing the Choice between the Use and Omission of the Definite Article Preceding Multi-word Organization Names: a Statistical Analysis. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics 8(1): 13–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2003. Validating the Logistic Model of Article Usage Preceding Multi-word Organization Names with the Aid of Computer Corpora. Literary and Linguistic Computing 18(3): 287–313. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2004. A Grammatical Study of Personal Names in Present-day English: with Special Reference to the Usage of the Definite Article. English Studies 85(3): 241–259. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Treccani Online. 2012. Articoli. Available at [URL] [last accessed 12 July 2016]
. 2012. Articolo. Available at [URL] [last accessed 12 July 2016]
. 2012. Omissione dell’Articolo. Available at [URL] [last accessed 12 July 2016]
. 2012. Nomi Propri. Available at [URL] [last accessed 28 October 2016]
. 2012. Nomi Propri [Prontuario]. Available at [URL] [last accessed 28 October 2016]
Yoo, I. W. 2007. Definite Article Usage before last/next time in Spoken and Written American English. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 12(1): 83–105. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Hundt, Marianne & Rahel Oppliger
2022. (The) fact is …/(Die) Tatsache ist …focaliser constructions in English and German are similar but subject to different constraints. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 27:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Imre, Attila
2022. Spotting Acronyms and Initialisms with the Help of Informatics. Acta Universitatis Sapientiae, Philologica 14:3 ► pp. 51 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.