Article published in:
English World-Wide
Vol. 41:2 (2020) ► pp. 225–254

The bike, the back, and the boyfriend

Confronting the “definite article conspiracy” in Canadian and British English

| KU Leuven
| University of Toronto
Using comparative sociolinguistic methods, we probe the underlying mechanisms governing the variation between possessive determiners, my bike, and the definite article, the bike, in possessive contexts in two mainstream English varieties (Canadian and British English, N = 6,217). Results indicate the is stable and pervasive, occurring approximately 30 percent of the time with personal domain possessed nouns. For some nouns, e.g. dog and cat, the occurs over 75 percent of the time. The Canadian Oxford Dictionary records possessive the as chiefly British, while Quirk et al. (1985: 271–272) observe that only low-status men use it; however, we find no difference between the UK and Canada, nor a significant gender or education effect in either dataset. When we model the variation between forms according to conceptions of ownership, we find an underlying system for encoding communal possession that transcends social categories and dialect: the more that possession is communal, the more the is used.
Keywords: definite article, determiners, possession, British English, Canadian English, comparative sociolinguistics, varieties of English, English dialects, alienability
Published online: 09 June 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.00047.gar
Sources

[ p. 251 ]Sources

Tagliamonte, Sali A.
2000–2001 Vernacular Roots: A Database of British Dialects. Research Grant. Arts & Humanities Research Board of the United Kingdom (AHRB) Research Grant. #041R00383.Google Scholar
2003–2006 Linguistic changes in Canada Entering the 21st Century. Research Grant. Social Sciences & Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC). #410-2003-0005.Google Scholar

References

Abate, Frank
ed. 1999 The Oxford American Dictionary of Current English (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Alexander, Louis G.
1988 Longman English Grammar. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Algeo, John
2006 British or American English? A Handbook of Word and Grammar Patterns. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Anthony, Laurence
2005 “AntConc: Design and Development of a Freeware Corpus Analysis Toolkit for the Tenchinal Writing Classroom”. Proceedings of the International Professional Communication Conference (IPCC), 729–737.Google Scholar
2006 AntConc (Version 3.2.0). Tokyo: Waseda University https://​www​.laurenceanthony​.net​/software​/antconc/.
Ayto, John
1998 The Oxford Dictionary of Slang. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Balley, Charles
1926 “L’expression des idées de sphère personnelle et de solidarité dans les langues indoeuropéenes”. In Franz Frankhauser, and Jakob Jud, eds. Festschrift Louis Gauchat. Aarau: Sauerländer, 68–78.Google Scholar
Barber, Katerine
ed. 2004 The Canadian Oxford Dictionary (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bates, Douglas M., Martin Maechler, Ben Bolker, and Steve Walker
2015 “Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4 ”. Journal of Statistical Software 67: 1–48. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad, and Edward Finegan
1999 The Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Bright, James W.
1917 An Anglo-Saxon Reader (4th ed.). New York: Henry Holt & Company.Google Scholar
Chappell, Hilary and William McGregory
1996 “Prolegomena to a Theory of Inalienability and Nominal Classification”. In Hilary Chappell, and William McGregory, eds. The Grammar of Inalienability: A Typological Perspective on Body Part Terms and the Part-Whole Relation. Berlin: De Gruyter, 3–30. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
D’Arcy, Alexandra and Sali A. Tagliamonte
2015 “Not Always Variable: Probing the Vernacular Grammar”. Language Variation and Change 27: 255–285. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dahl, Östen and Maria Koptjevskaja-Tamm
2001 “Kinship in Grammar”. In Irène Baron, Michael Herslund, and Finn Sørensen, eds. Dimensions of Possession. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 201–226. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 252 ]
Delport, Mary-France
1996 “Alternation Between the Possessive and the Article in Spanish”. Cahiers de praxematique 27: 35–56.Google Scholar
Deverson, Tony and Graeme Kennedy
2005 The New Zealand Oxford Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Eastwood, John
2002 The Oxford Guide to English Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Filppula, Markku
2002 The Grammar of Irish English: Language in Hibernian Style. London: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fowler, Henry W.
1998 The New Fowler’s Modern Usage: Revised Edition (3rd ed.). Edited by Robert W. Burchfield. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fruehwald, Josef and Joel C. Wallenberg
2013 “Optionality Is Stable Variation is Competing Grammars”. Paper presented at 25th Scandinavian Conference in Linguistics, University of Iceland.
Gardiner, Shayna and Naomi Nagy
2017 “Stable Variation vs. Language Change and the Factors that Constrain Them”. Penn Working Papers in Linguistics: Selected Papers from New Ways of Analyzing Variation (NWAV 45) 23: Article 10.Google Scholar
Grafmiller, Jason
2014 “Variation in English Genitives across Modality and Genres”. English Language and Linguistics 18: 471–496. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grannis, Oliver C.
1972 “The Definite Article Conspiracy in English”. Language Learning 22: 275–289. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Green, Jonathon
2010 Green’s Dictionary of Slang. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Haiman, John
1985 Natural Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin
1999 “External Possession in a European Areal Perspective”. In Immanuel Barshi, and Doris Payne, eds. External Possession. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 109–135. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin, Ekkehard König, Wulf Oesterreicher, and Wolfgang Raible
eds. 2001 Language Typology and Language Universals: An International Handbook. Vol. 1. Berlin: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hickey, Raymond
2007 Irish English: History and Present-Day Forms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hothorn, Torsten, Frank Bretz, and Peter Westfall
2008 “Simultaneous Inference in General Parametric Models”. Biometrical Journal 50: 346–363. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hudson, Kenneth
1977 Dictionary of Diseased English. London: Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kellner, Leon
1892 Historical Outlines of English Syntax. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
König, Ekkehard and Martin Haspelmath
1997 “Les constructions à possesseur externe dans les languages d’Europe”. In Jack Feuillet, ed. Actance et valence dans les languages de l’Europe. Berlin: De Gruyter, 525–606.Google Scholar
Labov, William
1966 The Social Stratification of English in New York City. Washington: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
1990 “The Intersection of Sex and Social Class in the Course of Linguistic Change”. Language Variation and Change 2: 205–254. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2001 Principles of Linguistic Change. Vol 2: Social Factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
McColl Miller, Robert
2007 Northern and Insular Scots. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 253 ]
McWhorter, John H.
2002 “What Happened to English?”. Diachronica 19: 217–272. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Merriam-Webster Online
https://​www​.merriam​-webster​.com/ (accessed 26 November, 2018).
Moore, Bruce
2004 Australian Oxford Dictionary (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna
1988 “On Alienable and Inalienable Possession”. In William Shipley, ed. In Honor of Mary Haas: From the Haas Festival Conference on Native American Linguistics. Berlin: De Gruyter, 475–521. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1992 Linguistic Diversity in Space and Time. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Procter, Paul
ed. 2014 Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English: For Advanced Learners (6th ed.). Harlow: Pearson Longman.Google Scholar
Purves, David
2002 A Scots Grammar: Scots Grammar & Usage. Revised and extended edition. Edinburgh: Bell & Bain.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolf and Charles L. Wren
1957 An Old English Grammar (2nd ed.). London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolf, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartik
1985 A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
R Core Team
2018 R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing https://​www​.R​-project​.org.
Rosenbach, Anette
2002 Genitive Variation in English: Conceptual Factors in Synchronic and Diachronic Studies. Berlin: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rupp, Laura and Sali A. Tagliamonte
2019 ““They Used to Follow Ø River”: The Zero Article in York English”. Journal of English Linguistics 47: 279–300. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Seiler, Hansjakob
1983 Possession as an Operational Dimension of Language. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Seržant, Ilja A.
2016 “External Possession and Constructions: That May Have It”. STUF – Language Typology and Universals 69: 131–169.Google Scholar
Stevenson, Angus
ed. 2010 Oxford Dictionary of English (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Stevenson, Angus, and Christine A. Lindberg
eds. 2010 New Oxford American Dictionary (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Strobl, Carolin, James Malley, and Gerhard Tutz
2009 “An Introduction to Recursive Partitioning: Rationale, Application, and Characteristics of Classification and Regression Trees, Bagging, and Random Forests”. Psychological Methods 14: 323–348. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Strobl, Carolin, Annle-Laure Boulesteix, Achim Zeileis, and Torsten Hothorn
2007 “Bias in Random Forest Variable Importance Measures: Illustrations, Sources, and a Solution”. BMC Bioinformatics 8: Article 25. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Swan, Michael
1996 Practical English Usage: International Student’s Edition (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A.
2012 Variationist Sociolinguistics: Change, Observation, Interpretation. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A. and R. Harald Baayen
2012 “Models, Forests, and Trees of York English: Was/Were Variation as a Case Study for Statistical Practice”. Language Variation and Change 24: 135–178. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 254 ]
Tagliamonte, Sali A. and Rebecca Roeder
2009 “Variation in the English Definite Article: Socio-Historical Linguistics in t’Speech Community”. Journal of Sociolinguistics 13: 435–471. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Todd, Loreto and Ian Hancock
1986 International English Usage. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Tomaschek, Fabian, Peter Hendrix, and R. Harald Baayen
2018 “Strategies for Addressing Collinearity in Multivariate Linguistic Data”. Journal of Phonetics 71: 249–267. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth C.
1999 “Syntax”. In Suzanne Romaine, ed. The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol. 4: 1776–1997. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 168–289.Google Scholar
Trudgill, Peter
1974 The Social Differentiation of English in Norwich. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Uhlenbeck, Christianus Cornelius
1917 “Het Identificeerend Karakter der Possessieve Flexie in Talen van Noord-Amerika”. Verslagen en Mededeelingen der Koninklijke Akademie van Wetenschappen, Afdeeling Letterkunde 5: 345–376.Google Scholar
Van Valin, Robert D., Jr. and Randy J. LaPolla
1997 Syntax: Structure, Meaning and Function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wallenberg, Joel C.
2013 “A Unified Theory of Stable Variation, Syntactic Optionality, and Syntactic Change”. Paper presented at the 15th Diachronic Generative Syntax Conference, University of Ottawa.
Wolk, Christoph, Joan Bresnan, Anette Rosenbach, and Benedikt Szmrecsanyi
2013 “Dative and Genitive Variability in Late Modern English: Exploring Cross-Constructional Variation and Change”. Diachronica 30: 382–419. CrossrefGoogle Scholar