journal: Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory

Impact Factor: 1.6

Published since May 20, 2005

Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory

ISSN: 1613-7035

Edited by: Stefanie Wulff

Founded by: Stefan Th. Gries, Anatol Stefanowitsch

Submit manuscript

About this journal

Objective
Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory (CLLT) is a peer-reviewed journal publishing high-quality original corpus-based research focusing on theoretically relevant issues in all core areas of linguistic research, or other recognized topic areas. It provides a forum for researchers from different theoretical backgrounds and different areas of interest that share a commitment to the systematic and exhaustive analysis of naturally occurring language. Contributions from all theoretical frameworks are welcome but they should be addressed at a general audience and thus be explicit about their assumptions and discovery procedures and provide sufficient theoretical background to be accessible to researchers from different frameworks.

Topics

Corpus Linguistics
Quantitative Linguistics
Phonology
Morphology
Semantics
Syntax
Pragmatics

Article formats
Research Articles

> Information on submission process

Your Benefits

Your benefits:

Original corpus-based research
In-depth comparison of corpus data to other kinds of empirical data
Many studies featuring high degrees of statistical sophistication
Rigorous peer-review
International and renowned editorial board

History

Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory was founded in 2005 by Stefan Th. Gries and Anatol Stefanowitsch together with the publisher De Gruyter Mouton.

Other publications in the field

Abstracting and Indexing

Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory is covered by the following services:

Baidu Scholar
BLL Bibliographie Linguistischer Literatur
Cabells Journalytics
CNKI Scholar (China National Knowledge Infrastructure)
CNPIEC - cnpLINKer
Dimensions
EBSCO (relevant databases)
EBSCO Discovery Service
ERIH PLUS (European Reference Index for the Humanities and Social Sciences)
Genamics JournalSeek
Google Scholar
IBR (International Bibliography of Reviews of Scholarly Literature in the Humanities and Social Sciences)
IBZ (International Bibliography of Periodical Literature in the Humanities and Social Sciences)
Ingenta Connect
J-Gate
Journal Citation Reports/Social Sciences Edition
JournalGuide
JournalTOCs
KESLI-NDSL (Korean National Discovery for Science Leaders)
Linguistic Bibliography
Linguistics Abstracts Online
MLA International Bibliography
MyScienceWork
Naver Academic
Naviga (Softweco)
Norwegian Register for Scientific Journals, Series and Publishers
OLC Linguistik
Primo Central (ExLibris)
ProQuest (relevant databases)
Publons
QOAM (Quality Open Access Market)
ReadCube
Scilit
SCImago (SJR)
SCOPUS
Semantic Scholar
Sherpa/RoMEO
Summon (ProQuest)
TDNet
Ulrich's Periodicals Directory/ulrichsweb
WanFang Data
Web of Science - Arts & Humanities Citation Index
Web of Science - Social Sciences Citation Index
WorldCat (OCLC)
X-MOL
Yewno Discover

Supplementary Materials

Topics

External Links

Volume 19 Issue 3

October 2023

Publicly Available October 11, 2023

Frontmatter

Page range: i-iii

Download PDF

Open Access June 20, 2022

An improved test of the constant rate hypothesis: late Modern American English possessive have

Richard Zimmermann

Page range: 323-352

More Download PDF

Abstract

The Constant Rate Hypothesis (CRH) predicts that a linguistic innovation should spread at identical rates of change in all grammatical contexts in which it is used (Kroch 1989. Reflexes of grammar in patterns of language change. Language Variation and Change 1(3). 199–244). Weaknesses in previous tests of the CRH are identified. A new study is conducted that improves upon them. It utilizes a syntactic change in late Modern American English possessive have , which altered its realization in the grammar-theoretically related contexts negation, inversion, VP-adjunction and VP-ellipsis. Data sets are collected from the Corpus of Historical American English (Davies 2010. The corpus of historical American English: 400 million words, 1810-2009. http://corpus.byu.edu/coha/ (accessed 10 September 2016)) and analyzed with mixed-effects logistic regression models. The statistical analysis reveals that it is indeed plausible to assume that each of the contexts innovates the use of possessive have at the same speed. Implications of the findings for the CRH are discussed.

August 10, 2022

In search of lost space

Daniel Rojas Plata, Noé Alejandro Castro Sánchez

Page range: 353-370

Abstract

This paper analyzes the semantics of the French and Spanish prepositions en from the point of view of diachrony. We focus on the spatial variation of their usage in both languages. Our methodological approach is based on a corpus analysis. We draw on comparable ancient texts and analyze some semantic categories that are fundamental for the spatial description. Our results reveal a fairly active evolution of prepositions with increases and decreases of usage where we did not expect them.

Open Access September 19, 2022

Comparing the functional range of English to be to German sein: a test of the boundary permeability hypothesis

Thomas Berg

Page range: 371-396

More Download PDF

Abstract

The boundary permeability hypothesis views language as a system of categories which are more or less rigidly separated from one another. In previous work on grammatical categories, English was characterized as a soft boundary and German as a strict boundary language. This project presents a test of the prediction that English to be has a wider functional range than its German counterpart sein . The range of these verbs is determined on the basis of a bidirectional translation study. English to be is translated by a larger variety of lexical verbs in German while sein is translated by a smaller number of lexical verbs in English. In fact, the translation equivalents of sein form a subset of those of to be . Moreover, to be plays a much larger role in constructions such as there is and it is than sein does. The boundary permeability hypothesis views this structural difference and the wider semantic range of to be as two sides of the same coin. It is suggested that English is a more speaker-friendly language than German.

September 20, 2022

Register variation remains stable across 60 languages

Haipeng Li, Jonathan Dunn, Andrea Nini

Page range: 397-426

Abstract

This paper measures the stability of cross-linguistic register variation. A register is a variety of a language that is associated with extra-linguistic context. The relationship between a register and its context is functional: the linguistic features that make up a register are motivated by the needs and constraints of the communicative situation. This view hypothesizes that register should be universal, so that we expect a stable relationship between the extra-linguistic context that defines a register and the sets of linguistic features which the register contains. In this paper, the universality and robustness of register variation is tested by comparing variation within versus between register-specific corpora in 60 languages using corpora produced in comparable communicative situations: tweets and Wikipedia articles. Our findings confirm the prediction that register variation is, in fact, universal.

October 4, 2022

Alternation phenomena and language proficiency: the genitive alternation in the spoken language of EFL learners

Tanguy Dubois, Magali Paquot, Benedikt Szmrecsanyi

Page range: 427-450

Abstract

This study investigates how foreign language proficiency, which previous corpus-based research on alternation phenomena has largely ignored, influences the choice of genitive variant ( the tail of the dog/the dog’s tail ) in learners of English as a Foreign Language. The data stems from the Trinity Lancaster Corpus, a three-million-word corpus featuring spoken language from low-intermediate to advanced learners of English from several L1 backgrounds. The collected genitive observations were annotated for various constraints such as the length, animacy, definiteness and discourse status of the constituents and then analyzed via mixed-effects logistic regression. The results show that although native speakers and learners are remarkably similar, low-proficiency learners are less sensitive to possessor definiteness and possessor animacy, the latter of which is otherwise the strongest constraint of the genitive alternation.

Open Access November 11, 2022

“Thank you for the terrific party!” – An analysis of Hungarian negative emotive words

Martina Katalin Szabó, Veronika Vincze, Károly Bibok

Page range: 451-485

More Download PDF

Abstract

The term negative emotive word refers to those words that, on their own, i.e. without context, have a semantic content that may be associated with negative emotion, but sometimes they lose it partly or wholly. In the literature negative emotive words are mainly discussed within the group of intensifiers, e.g. awfully good. In the present paper, we call this phenomenon polarity loss . At the same time, there is another use of negative emotive words that is rarely discussed in the literature, namely the case where the examined word, despite its negative semantic content, expresses a positive evaluation of the speaker, e.g. brutális alaplap (lit. ‘brutal motherboard’ – ‘high quality motherboard’). We call this phenomenon polarity shift . The aim here is to thoroughly examine the two different phenomena on the basis of the data of a Hungarian speech corpus HuTongue. After an in-depth analysis of the qualitative and quantitative features of negative emotive words, we propose corresponding ways of their meaning representations, using a lexical pragmatic approach and the concept of enantiosemy.

October 12, 2022

Parts of speech and the placement of Targets in the corpus of languages in northwestern Iran

Hiwa Asadpour

Page range: 487-522

Abstract

This study applies a corpus-based quantitative approach to the word order typology and linguistic theories about word order in several genetically unrelated language varieties in northwestern Iran, such as Mukri Kurdish, Northeastern Kurdish and Armenian (Indo-European), Jewish Neo-Aramaic (Semitic), and Azeri Turkic (Turkish). Despite the difference in the default position of the direct object, the existing corpora of published and personal field data of narrative free speech demonstrate that these languages share the clause-final position of Targets predominantly (e.g., physical and metaphorical goals, recipients, addressees, and resultant-states) in their word order. Yet, Targets are more flexible in Mukri Kurdish, Northeastern Neo-Aramaic, and Azeri Turkic, whereas they are less flexible in Armenian and Northeastern Kurdish. Among various factors relevant to the placement of Targets, morphosyntactic features such as parts of speech exhibit constraints and clear preferences in the pre- and postverbal placement of Targets.

Ahead of Print / Just Accepted

Ahead of Print / Just Accepted

Volume 19 (2023)

Volume 18 (2022)

Volume 17 (2021)

Volume 16 (2020)

Volume 15 (2019)

Volume 14 (2018)

Volume 13 (2017)

Volume 12 (2016)

Volume 11 (2015)

Volume 10 (2014)

Volume 9 (2013)

Volume 8 (2012)

Volume 7 (2011)

Volume 6 (2010)

Volume 5 (2009)

Volume 4 (2008)

Volume 3 (2007)

Volume 2 (2006)

Volume 1 (2005)

Journal Impact Factor	1.6	2022, Journal Citation Reports (Clarivate, 2023)
5-year Journal Impact Factor	1.9	2022, Journal Citation Reports (Clarivate, 2023)
Journal Citation Indicator	1.70	2022, Journal Citation Reports (Clarivate, 2023)
CiteScore	4.3	2022, Scopus (Elsevier B.V., 2023)
SCImago Journal Rank	1.141	2022, SJR (Scimago Lab, 2023; Data Source: Scopus)
Source Normalized Impact per Paper	2.413	2022, CWTS Journal Indicators (CWTS B.V., 2023; Data Source: Scopus)

More information about journal rankings

Submit

Submission
You can easily submit your manuscript online. Simply go to...
http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cllt
...and you will be guided through the whole peer-reviewing and publishing process.

Preparing your manuscript
Before you submit your manuscript, make sure to read our instructions for authors here.

Your benefits of publishing with us

Rapid online publication ahead-of-print with short turnaround times
High quality manuscript processing through ScholarOne Manuscripts®
Optional open access publication
Accepted papers will be published online first as DOI-citable, forward-linked articles for quickest possible visibility for the scientific community
Every article easily discoverable because of SEO and comprehensive abstracting and indexing services
Secure archiving by De Gruyter and the independent archiving service Portico

Submission process

Submission of your paper via our submission management tool
Peer review process (you will be guided through every step)
Decision on your paper (four months from submission to first decision)
If accepted: you have the option to publish it open access.
Publication online and in print

Please note

Please see the De Gruyter Mouton journal style sheet for further information regarding the proper formatting of your manuscript
Manuscripts must be written in clear and concise English
Before submitting your article please have a look at our Publication Ethics Statement and our copyright agreement
Once your article is accepted you have the option to publish it open access.
Our repository policy allows you to distribute 30 PDF copies of your published article to colleagues (the PDF has to include the information that it is an author's copy). Please also feel free to distribute the link to the online abstract
If you have any general questions please visit our FAQ page for journal authors

We look forward to receiving your manuscript!

Hybrid Open Access

Authors have the option to publish their article under an open access license. The standard article processing charge for a hybrid open access article is 2,000 Euro (plus VAT if applicable). Please note that corresponding authors from institutions with which we have a transformative agreement, can publish open access without paying the fee. More information on the eligible institutions and articles can be found here.

Editorial

Editor-in-Chief
Stefanie Wulff
Linguistics Department
University of Florida
4015 Turlington Hall, P.O. Box 115454
Gainesville, Florida 32611-5454
USA
e-mail: swulff@ufl.edu

Founding Editors
Stefan Th. Gries, University of California, Santa Barbara, USA (now General Editor)
Anatol Stefanowitsch, Free University of Berlin, Germany

Editorial Board
Harald Baayen (University of Tübingen, Germany)
Alvin Chen (National Taiwan Normal University, Taiwan)
Jesse Egbert (Northern Arizona University, USA)
Susanne Flach (University of Zurich, Switzerland)
Martin Hilpert (University of Neuchâtel, Switzerland)
Frank Keller (University of Edinburgh, UK)
Anke Lüdeling (Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany)
Stewart McCauley (the University of Iowa, USA)
Magali Paquot (Université catholique de Louvain, Belgium)
Florent Perek (University of Birmingham, UK)
Anna Theakston (University of Manchester, UK)
Amir Zeldes (Georgetown University, USA)

(Deutsch)

Online ISSN: 1613-7035
Print ISSN: 1613-7027
Type: Journal
Language: English
Publisher: De Gruyter Mouton
First published: May 20, 2005
Publication Frequency: 3 Issues per Year
Audience: Researchers from different theoretical backgrounds and with different areas of interest that share a commitment to the systematic and exhaustive analysis of naturally occurring language