131,011 to 131,020 of 131,027 Results
Jun 16, 2014 -
Why Russian Prefixes Aren’t Empty
Plain Text - 1.1 KB -
MD5: 11d1c771365686606e450d20d886f0e1
This R script will give you the chi-squared value, the degrees of freedom, the p-value, and the effect size for Table 1 in Chapter 3. You can open and read the commentary in the R script to see how it is done. |
Jun 16, 2014 -
Why Russian Prefixes Aren’t Empty
Plain Text - 3.2 KB -
MD5: 460e10aa9d60a3b0fa52e4c9e4a76264
We used a simple formula involving the row and column totals in order to calculate the expected values for all the cells in Table 1. Here it is: expected value = (row sum x column sum) / total sum. The total sum for Table 1 is 382, and all of the row and column totals are listed in Table 1 in Chapter 3. This R script will compute and print out for... |
Jun 16, 2014 -
Why Russian Prefixes Aren’t Empty
Plain Text - 30.0 KB -
MD5: 74c93d226b3e57f3987bc11b99edd2eb
The Russian verb gruzit’ ‘load’ is special for three reasons. First, this verb has two syntactic constructions it can appear in, second it has three Natural Perfectives, and third all three Natural Perfectives can also use both constructions. The two constructions that gruzit’ ‘load’ can appear in are called the “theme-object” construction and the... |
Jun 16, 2014 -
Why Russian Prefixes Aren’t Empty
Plain Text - 1.2 KB -
MD5: 4ef97f730a49bc25e603b468794a4261
The first thing the R script does is to give you a summary of the dataset. Scroll up to the top of the results and you will find a table that looks like this: CONSTRUCTION VERB REDUCED PARTICIPLE goal : 871 _zero:393 no :1353 no : 895 theme:1049 na :368 yes: 567 yes:1025 po :703 za :456 This table tells you how many items of each t... |
Jun 16, 2014 -
Why Russian Prefixes Aren’t Empty
Comma Separated Values - 3.4 KB -
MD5: cf05fcf112f6b14aef44363cfc6f3f09
In Chapter 5 we look at simplex verbs that have two or more Natural Perfectives formed by attaching prefixes. When a simplex verb uses more than one prefix to form Natural Perfectives, we call this “prefix variation”. For example if you look up грузить/ gruzit’ ‘load’ in the Ožegov & Švedova (2001) dictionary, you find that it uses three prefixes,... |
Jun 16, 2014 -
Why Russian Prefixes Aren’t Empty
Plain Text - 96.5 KB -
MD5: 7e204860460fb3d016f3c453249ecbf3
Aspectual Triplets: An aspectual triplet is a set of three verbs, consisting of a simplex verb, a prefixed Natural Perfective, and a secondary imperfective derived via suffixation of the Natural Perfective. All three verbs have the same lexical meaning and the members of a triplet set differ from each other primarily in terms of aspect. An example... |
Jun 13, 2014 -
Metonymy in Word-Formation: Russian, Czech, and Norwegian
MS Excel Spreadsheet - 282.5 KB -
MD5: b3abaf47f0d2709306156a28f7298e72
Charts based on the data in the databases. R=Russian, C=Czech, N=Norwegian, P&G refers to the study by Peirsman and Geeraerts 2006 cited in the article. met des = metonymy designation (how many metonymy patterns a suffix has) |
Jun 13, 2014 -
Metonymy in Word-Formation: Russian, Czech, and Norwegian
MS Excel Spreadsheet - 114.0 KB -
MD5: 28f8ea3059c113974e55d8bb3ea64c62
More charts and comparisons based on the databases. uni = unidirectional metonymy (source-target relationship is not reversed) |
Jun 13, 2014 -
Metonymy in Word-Formation: Russian, Czech, and Norwegian
MS Excel Spreadsheet - 117.5 KB -
MD5: 4f1441a18a3fe9ae6b12974d61351d86
This file contains analysis of the data in Czech database info2.xls. vehicle=source, taut=tautological relationship (source/vehicle=target), uni=unidirectional relationship (not reversible), bi=bidirectional relationship |
Jun 13, 2014 -
Metonymy in Word-Formation: Russian, Czech, and Norwegian
MS Excel Spreadsheet - 196.0 KB -
MD5: 2e039be22e019250e98fa4cde7f2772e
This is the data base of word-formational metonymy designations for Czech. Found in Geeraerts?=whether the type is found in the article by Peirsman & Geeraerts 2006 cited in the article |
