Cover not available
Part of
Time in Languages, Languages in Time
Edited by Anna Čermáková, Thomas Egan, Hilde Hasselgård and Sylvi Rørvik
[Studies in Corpus Linguistics 101] 2021
► pp. 39–66

Diachronic change in the ordering of kinship binomials

A contrastive perspective

 | Charles University, Prague
One of the specific characteristics of binomials is the ordering of their elements and the degree of their reversibility. A diachronic perspective suggests it is particularly the kinship binomials that show a strong unfreezing trend away from the male-first ordering. This study explores, diachronically and from an English-Czech contrastive perspective, kinship binomials in children’s literature. It confirms earlier findings of a gradual diachronic reversal of term ordering in kinship binomials that extends across languages. However, at the same time, binomial sequencing seems to be a complex interplay of linguistic, cognitive and real-world influences. The diachronic reversal of preference in the ordering is limited to particular binomials and may be linked to a more general change in the discourse, namely the shift towards greater informality.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.On binomials and kinship terms
  • 3.Data and method
  • 4.Diachronic development of English kinship terms
    • 4.1Kinship binomials in the 19th century children’s literature
    • 4.2Kinship terms in contemporary children’s books
  • 5.Diachronic development of Czech kinship terms
  • 6.Extended cross-linguistic perspective
  • 7.Conclusions
  • Acknowldegements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 17 September 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.101.03cer
References (40)
References
Abrahams, Richard D. 1950. Fixed order of coordinates: A study in comparative lexicography. The Modern Language Journal 34(4): 276–287. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Benor, Sarah Bunin & Levy, Roger. 2006. The chicken or the egg? A probabilistic analysis of English binomials. Language 82(2): 233–277. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Čermák, František. 2010. Binomials: Their nature in Czech and in general. In Phraseologie global – areal – regional. Akten der Konferenz EUROPHRAS 2008, Jarmo Korhonen, Wolfgang Mieder, Elisabeth Piirainen & Rosa Piñel (eds), 309–315. Tübingen: Narr. Google Scholar
Čermáková, Anna. 2017.  The GLARE 19th Century Children’s Literature Corpus in CLiC [Blog post]. <[URL]> (1 October 2019).
. 2018. ChiLit: The GLARE 19th Century Children’s Literature Corpus in CLiC [Blog post]. [URL] (1 October 2019).
Čermáková, Anna & Chlumská, Lucie. 2017. Expressing place in children’s literature. Testing the limits of the n-gram method in contrastive linguistics. In Cross-linguistic Correspondences. From Lexis to Genre [Studies in Language Companion Series 191], Thomas Egan & Hildegunn Dirdal (eds), 75–96. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chaloupka, Otakar & Voráček, Jaroslav. 1979. Kontury české literatury pro děti a mláděž. Praha: Albatros. Google Scholar
Cooper, William E. & Ross, John Robert. 1975. World order. In Functionalism, Robin E. Grossman, L. James San & Timothy J. Vance (eds), 63–111. Chicago IL: Chicago Linguistic Society. Google Scholar
Craig, Lyn. 2016. Contemporary Motherhood: The Impact of Children on Adult Time. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croft, William. 2003. Typology and Universals. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar
Danet, Brenda. 1985. Legal discourse. In Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Teun A. Van Dijk (ed.), 273–291. London: Academia Press. Google Scholar
Dant, Doris R. 2013. Mom and Dad but Men and Women: The sequencing of sex-determined noun pairs in American English. In Corpus Perspectives on Patterns of Lexis [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 57], Hilde Hasselgård, Jarle Ebeling & Signe Oksefjell Ebeling (eds), 35–46. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ebeling, Jarle & Ebeling, Signe Oksefjell. 2013. Patterns in Contrast [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 58], Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giammarresi, Salvatore. 2010. Formulaicity and translation: A cross-corpora analysis of English formulaic binomials and their Italian translations. In Perspectives on Formulaic Language: Acquisition and Communications, David Wood (ed.), 257–74. London: Bloomsbury. Google Scholar
Gustaffson, Marita. 1975. Binomial Expressions in Present-Day English. A Syntactic and Semantic Study. Turku: Turun Yliopisto. Google Scholar
Hegarty, Peter, Watson, Nila, Fletcher, Laura & McQueen, Grant. 2011. When gentlemen are first and ladies are last: Effects of gender stereotypes on the order of romantic partners’ names. British Journal of Social Psychology 50(1): 21–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hiltunen, Risto. 1990. Chapters on Legal English: Aspects Past and Present of the Language of the Law. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia. Google Scholar
Iliev, Rumen & Smirnova, Anastasia. 2016. Revealing word order: Using serial position in binomials to predict properties of the speaker. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 45(2): 205–235. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jerrim, John & Moss, Gemma. 2019. The link between fiction and teenagers’ reading skills: International evidence from the OECD PISA study. British Educational Research Journal 45(1): 181–200. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1905. Growth and Structure of the English Language. Leipzig: Teubner. Google Scholar
Klégr, Aleš & Čermák, Jan. 2008. Binomials in an historical English literary perspective: Shakespeare, Chaucer, Beowulf. In Shakespeare between the Middle Ages and Modernity: From Translator’s Art to Academic Discourse. A Tribute to Professor Martin Hilský, Aleš Klégr, Jan Čermák & Martin Procházka (eds). Prague: Charles University. Google Scholar
Kopaczyk, Joanna & Sauer, Hans. 2017. Binomials in the History of English. Fixed and Flexible. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar
Lévi-Strauss, Claude. 1949. Les Structures élémentaires de la parenté. Paris: Presses universitaires de France. Google Scholar
Lohmann, Arne. 2014. English Coordinate Constructions: A Processing Perspective on Constituent Order. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Love, Robbie, Dembry, Claire, Hardie, Andrew, Brezina, Vaclav & McEnery, Tony. 2017. The Spoken BNC2014: Designing and building a spoken corpus of everyday conversations. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 22(3): 319–344. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lohmann, Arne & Takada, Tayo. 2014. Order in NP conjuncts in spoken English and Japanese. Lingua 152: 48–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Malkiel, Yakov. 1959. Studies in irreversible binomials. Lingua 8: 113–160. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mollin, Sandra. 2014. The (Ir)reversibility of English Binomials [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 64]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moon, Rosamund. 1998. Fixed Expressions and Idioms in English. Oxford: Clarendon. Google Scholar
Morgan, Emily & Levy, Roger. 2016. Abstract knowledge versus direct experience in processing of binomial expressions. Cognition 157: 384–402. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Motschenbacher, Heiko. 2013. Gentlemen before ladies? A corpus-based study of conjunct order in personal binomials. Journal of English Linguistics 41(3): 212–42. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nikolajeva, Maria. 2014. Reading for Learning: Cognitive Approaches to Children’s Literature [Children’s Literature, Culture, and Cognition 3]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Onishi, Kristine H., Murphy, Gregory L. & Bock, Kathryn. 2008. Prototypicality in sentence production. Cognitive Psychology 56(2): 103–141. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pordány, László. 1986. Irreversible binomials in Hungarian. Acta Linguistica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 36(1-4): 151–79. Google Scholar
Reynolds, Kim. 2011. Children’s Literature: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siyanova-Chantura, Anna, Conklin, Kathy & van Heuven, Walter J. B. 2011. Seeing a phrase time and again matters: The role of phrasal frequency in the processing of multiword sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 37(3): 776–784. Google Scholar
Sobkowiak, Włodzimierz. 1993. Unmarked-before-marked as a freezing principle. Language and Speech 36(4): 393–414. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tachihara, Karina & Goldberg, Adele E. 2019. Cognitive accessibility predicts word order of couples’ names in English and Japanese. Cognitive Linguistics. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wright, Saundra & Hay, Jennifer. 2002. Fred and Wilma: A phonological conspiracy. In Gendered Practices in Language, Sarah Benor, Mary Rose, Devyani Sharma, Julie Sweetland & Quing Zhang (eds), 175–91. Stanford CA: CSLI. Google Scholar
Wright, Saundra K., Hay, Jennifer & Bent, Tessa. 2005. Ladies first? Phonology, frequency, and the naming conspiracy. Linguistics 43(3): 531–561. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Čermáková, Anna & Michaela Mahlberg
2021. The representation of mothers and the gendered social structure of nineteenth-century children’s literature. English Text Construction 14:2 ► pp. 119 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.