Although number agreement between the verbal form of the existential thereconstructions (hereafter TCs) and the post-verbal NP (hereafter PVNP) seems to constitute the norm, the degree of non-concord in this respect is a noticeable phenomenon worthy of being studied and characterised.From a corpus-based approach, this paper seeks to investigate whether or not there is a direct and/or causative connection between non-concord and factors such as the medium of expression, the type of polarity, the length and structural complexity of the PVNP (notional subject), the presence of co-ordination in the post-verbal sequence or the existence of some intervening elements between the verb and the PVNP.It is hypothesised that TCs containing long, structurally complicated postverbal sequences or those with some intervening element between verb and NP will present a higher frequency of non-concord. Speech, with its faster and somehow unplanned character and its higher degree of interaction between participants, is also assumed to foster this lack of agreement. *
This article emerges from the need to connect linguistic theory and language teaching to find concrete solutions to problems Spanish students confront when learning English. This study looks at existential there constructions taken from the following native and non‐native written English corpora: the International Corpus of Learner English and the Santiago University Learner of English Cor‐pus for the non‐native set, and the Louvain Corpus of Native English Essays, Biber et al. (1999) and a subcorpus of the BNC for the native English group. This contrastive study reveals important differences in the use of there constructions as regards their frequency, structural complexity, polarity and pragmatic value. Important implications for the presentation and the pedagogical treatment of the there constructions can be derived from the results.
The category of the noun phrase in English has received much attention in the literature. This article discusses the main defining features of the category from different theoretical angles. Issues such as its structural status, the determination and characterisation of its (morphosyntactic, semantic, cognitive) head, the structural slots which are available in the phrase, and the different possibilities as far as word order is concerned will be approached from structural, syntactic, functional and cognitive perspectives. In the second half of the article, after a review of recent literature on the English noun phrase, we offer a summary of the research included in this issue.
There is general agreement that be is the verb 'par excellence' in so-called English existential í/iere-constructions (existential TCs). In fact, on many occasions, a distinction is made between existential TCs -be TCs-and presentational TCs (non-be TCs). It is true, however, that other verbs may also occur in TCs. These are mainly intransitive verbs that express the ideas of permanence, being, existence, movement, position, entrance into the scene of discourse, arrival or continuation of an event (seem, come, remain, follow, develop, etc.).From a corpus-driven perspective, the proportion of non-be TCs in Present Day English (PDE) is analysed, granting special attention to their communicative valué. It is hypothesised that even though, strictly speaking, non-be TCs do not primarily express existence, they do share with be TCs their main pragmatic function -i.e. signal function-a traitgenuinely linked to the use of there. It is also examined whether any significant difference is observed between the use of non-be TCs in speech and writing, and what is the rationale for this difference (if any).
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.