Pimp my Lexis Constructional borrowing

Transcription

1 Pimp my Lexis Constructional borrowing Freek Van de Velde Eline Zenner (FWO Flanders) University of Leuven RU Quantitative Lexicology and Variational Linguistics

2 Pimp my Ride 1. Background: Constructional Borrowing 2. Presenting the case study: Pimp my Ride 3. Results 4. Conclusion

3 Borrowing vs. Codeswitching borrowing codeswitching Het is free! Single-word switch?

4 Borrowing vs. Codeswitching borrowing Het is free! codeswitching Het is free! proficiency SP morphophonemic adaptation listedness frequency (hapax legomena).

5 Borrowing vs. Codeswitching borrowing Het is free! codeswitching Additional question: position MWU? Borrowing constructions

6 Cognitive Contact Linguistics CogLing Contact Ling Construction Grammar Borrowability our study Taal-en Tongval 2015

7 Cognitive Contact Linguistics So far: borrowability at various levels of the schema Our study: evolution of a phrase on the continuum Case: maximally fixed, maximally conventional unit Taal-en Tongval 2015

8 Pimp my Ride

9 Pimp my Ride 1. Background: Constructional Borrowing 2. Presenting the case study: Pimp my Ride 3. Results 4. Conclusion

10 Pimp my Ride Proper name: Maximally fixed, maximally conventional

11 Pimp my Ride Odds of penetration in Standard (Belgian) Dutch seem low proper name road to common use? foreign word puristic tendencies? youth culture not general? salacious original meaning to be avoided? MWU instead of SWU less borrowable? opleuken as valid alternative for verb pimp not needed And yet? Clear support for penetration & constructional change

12 Data Recent corpus (>2004) Mediargus Illustrated De Morgen vs. Het Laatste Nieuws Formal register Standard language

13 Types of penetration 1. Semantic shift: from pimp pooier to pimp opleuken 2. From proper to common 3. Constructional dependence on pimp my ride 4. Constructional dependence on pimp POS N 5. Semantic extension of pimped object 6. Decreasing use of flagging-devices 7. Lexical competition with RL alternative

14 Pimp my Ride 1. Background: Constructional Borrowing 2. Presenting the case study: Pimp my Ride 3. Results 4. Conclusion

15 Penetration (1): Semantic shift Semantiek * Diachroon 100 pooier opleuken absoluut Totaal Percentage

16 Penetration (2): From proper to common Eigennaam? * Diachroon 100 EN geen EN absoluut Totaal Percentage Pimp je Fiets vs. pimp je fiets

17 Penetration (3): Decreasing constructional dependence I 100 Pimp My Ride? * Diachroon zonder 'pooier' ja nee absoluut Totaal Percentage Verifying how many of the pimp-opleuken are part of the construction pimp my ride

18 Penetration (4): Decreasing constructional dependence II Pimp_Poss_N * Diachroon 100 ja nee absoluut Totaal Percentage Relaxing the construction through open slots pimp je fiets vs. pimpen

19 Penetration (5): Semantic extention Pimpobject * Diachroon Totaal Percentage auto ander voertuig ander absoluut Vervolgens pimpten ze Frank Deboosere (De Morgen 12/07/2008) Gerty Christoffels hoopt met haar boek het seksleven in Vlaanderen te 'pimpen'. (Laatste Nieuws 28/08/2009)

20 Penetration (6): Flagging Context * Diachroon Totaal Percentage eng nl_flagged nl_unflagged absoluut

21 Penetration (7): Competing with RL alternatives Opleuken * Diachroon 100 pimpen opleuken absoluut Totaal Percentage

22 Pimp my Ride 1. Background: Constructional Borrowing 2. Presenting the case study: Pimp my Ride 3. Results 4. Conclusion

23 Conclusion - Surprisingly fast spread of the construction - Surprisingly fast evolution in fixedness of the construction - Both morphosyntactic and semantic detached from original proper name Needed analysis of more MWU

24 For more information: