<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="J79-1011">
  <Title>ssociation for Computational Lingui~tics</Title>
  <Section position="5" start_page="15" end_page="30" type="metho">
    <SectionTitle>
VARIAELES CZSCRIMZNATTNG FICTICN
FEON THE FCUE NCN-FICTION GENEES
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> fiction genres are more alike in syntactic structure than any cf them are like s~nt~nces from ficticn. This may, at first view, be surprising in light of the range o-f nonficticn genres included In the study, but it bears out the findings of at least cna cther investigatic~ cf quantitative characteristics of the language of different genres (Parckworth and 5~11, 1967, on sentence-length distributicns): that the major rneasurabl'e stylistic distlnctlcr is between fictian and no-n-ficticn gmres, 3~veial interesting cbservations may ke made about the syntactic variables that participate in the discrimination (ses Table 4). The mcst obvious pclnt Is the heavy lnvclvem.~r.t cf syntactic featutes of the verbal u~it ir, differ~ntiatlny fiction frcm non-fiction styles. With the exception cf i~clusicn -- of -- direct ,,,~,r discource which seems trans~arent~ly attribut~bl~ 70 5 he dlalogue characteristic of flction, znd tce lack cf yassive ----- ------- ccnstructicns, ---- since voice has b~en shcwx tc be a whole-sect~~~~ focus ph~romenon (Andzcw, 1974), all of the variables in Tzblz 4 ar/e associated with verbal rather thai: nominal elements cf ~E sentence. Markicg f cr uaf tens= and hcrfective ----I---- agpecr, intracsisivo verb- and contricted verbal f9~1_s are all , -3 1 ----- ---specific tc the verb ~hrase, and s&amp;erbi&amp; +shs and ofher =dvezkials are EUither specifically verk-modif ying or arc  -------..-whcls-srntencs-modifyj ng. Ap~arerxly elemects of the nour,  phrase, cr at least those considered in this study, do not partici+pa te in the dist inctivedy style-associated constellatlcns of syntactic structkpes that distinguish f icticc f rcm non-flction.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> B seccnd not able feature diszicguishing the fiction sentence set is the amount of indicaticn of past time action. This is ccnveyed nct cnly by the fcrmal past -- tense variatle, uhich in rhe great majority of cases does indicate e past time acrion, but also by the perfective aspect, which L always- indicates a Fast time event whether marlied for past cr resent tense. This feature is perhaps understandable in view cf the usual function of fiction as a rarrarive of past EUvents, and it stlould alsc be noted that this saw functio~ may utilize another role of perfective psp~ct--that of hterrelating s~qusntial Events thrcuqh ti,mc, k questioo may b~ raised about the relatienship of two of the ficticn-distinguishing variables: the presence of intransitiv~ varbs and the absezce of passiw ccnstructions. -.-----..I----- ---I Sinca these two exhibit a non-raciprocal grammatical cocccuzience restriction bstueen voic~ and v~rb type--passive voice im~lies a trarsitive verb but not vice versa--it is ~ossitle +hat the paucity of eassive -- ---- ccnstructiohs in ficticr, 3s sia~ly ax arte'act of the rrequency of in'trancitiva verbs in cth~r uozds, we must ask whether ------z---, ,,* passive sentences occur less in fiction than in non-fiction sim~ly because they have less o~portunity to do so, or whether nch-~assiveness is an independent syntactic feature of fiction style. k ccm~ariscn of the ratics of occurrence ccnstructicn to transitive V~L&amp; in the ficti~n of ESS_S~_V_E ----------and ncn-fiction genres shews the latter casE to be the true one. (Such a ratio ex~resses the actual occurrence of ~assive scntenc~s in relaticn to the possitle occurrences. ) The ratios for the five genres are</Paragraph>
    <Section position="1" start_page="19" end_page="19" type="sub_section">
      <SectionTitle>
Fiction
Learned Journ'als
Neus~aper Re~ortage
Fopular Journals
Government Documents
</SectionTitle>
      <Paragraph position="0"> It is tem~ting to speculate about lust why the fiction genre should he characterized by significantly more intranzltive verbs 11--..1-11---.1 ----tc cause this variable to be dis~~rirninatcry. Cne possible explanation, which suggests a sirnpl~ characterizatic~ of fiction style, cculd be based on analyzing a large subset (if not the whole class) of verbs usually callfa intransii~zg 2s items which can occur both wlth nc ohjact (traditionally called intransitivs verbs) and with cns cr two objects (traditionalfy called tracsitives). in such &amp;n analysis it is presuv~d that when the gramm+tlcal object of a verb of thls class is either redun c6nt or riot c~rr~lct~l y speclfi~d it is SUF~~?SSE~ and. John the result is a one-place ,predicate s~ntcnce, e. g., sang. When the grammatical object carries new or requirea  --informatior, it is ~resent and the result is a multiple-place Greek fclksong. This sart of predicate, e.g., Jchn sang a -analysis cf the I~intran~itivs~~ verb o.pens the door to a vsry general characterization of genre differences. I hus viewed, the ------------ ictransitivs ---- verb variable characteriz~s sentences which are nct heavily inPS crmatlcc crienred--sentences in which a major coinponent, th~ gr=zmn:atFcal cb ject , is elther so predictable cr sc ucim~ortant thirt it is nct iver. spscified. such s~nt~ncss are signific.zntly more charect~rlst~ic of flction than cf ncn-f icticn wxiting, and this analysis of xh~m suggesrs a rneasurakl~ hasis for the cld rule of thumb t that succzssful (although nct necessarilj good) Action wiixirg is strcngly ection oriented, It alsc suggests the validity cf the ccmmon-sense iatuft3or. tha~ a primary source of the diff~r~nc~s betwcez ~iction end non-fiction is that the latter is designed fcremost as an information-cox-v~ying instrument; that in the dichctdmy cf litera ry purp~.se it is mere likely tc* teach khan to delight, Since orie of tke major ways in which infcrmation can be packed into a sentence is through heary use of nominal ~lements, we locked at a simple measure of this characterization cf fiction style as actior.-oriented as c~pcssd tc non-fiction style as informaticn-or~en~ed: the verb/pcun ratic fcr each genre,</Paragraph>
    </Section>
    <Section position="2" start_page="19" end_page="19" type="sub_section">
      <SectionTitle>
Fopular Journals
Governm~nt Documents
</SectionTitle>
      <Paragraph position="0"> tearing cut the su~position that sentcncea in the nonficticn genres have ncre ncuns in proporti.cn to verbs than do those frcm fiction. It ma,y also bc noted that, in additicn tc beir.9 high In nouns ir. prcporticn to verbs, non-fiction sentences alsc exhibit somewhat more noun modlficatlon than fiction, as shown by the folLouing ratios of ail noun-modifisi ty~~s (variables 28, is, 30, -71, 32, and 32) tc ncuns:</Paragraph>
    </Section>
    <Section position="3" start_page="19" end_page="30" type="sub_section">
      <SectionTitle>
Fiction
Learned Journals
News~aper Reportage
Popular Jcurnals
Government Dccuments
</SectionTitle>
      <Paragraph position="0"> Ihus, frcm the discrimlcazory vzriebles identified by the five-group discriminant function a~alysis and the furth~r okel;vaticns sugg~sttd by them, a ~icture erneLges of distinctive syntactic structure constellaticns in at least two major Genre categories: fiction, with the syntactic structures determined by the function of pgst-time, actioncrient~d, narrative ccrnrnunicaticn; and ncn-f iction, with structur~s 3eternined by cn information-carrying function.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="1"> The f ivp-cjroup discriminant function analysis showed such a ma jcr distinction b'etnleh fiction ard the non-fiction genres that it seemed possible that differences in tho nonficti.cn genres mlght have been obscured, In ccnsequerice, a fourdgrou~ discrinicant function analysis ues dcn~ on data from these gecr es crly, The result indicated a disticcti~~ in syrtactic stiucturf between the forma-1 genres (Learned Journals ar? d Goverr,n;ent Docurn~nts) a~d the ir,f ormal (Neus,y.aFEr 'Ie~ortage and Popular Journals) alcng the first axis, and alcr,g th~ s~cor.d axis a distinction betweex Eopular Jcurnals and News~apzr Reportage, The third dimsnslon distinguished Lsazned Journals from Governmefit Locumfnts (see ~igur~ 2).</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="2"> Table 5 shows tho, sy~tactic variables that par-ticipate in these thres discr~minations. These discriminating structures present a less distinct picture cf dlffer~nt A 'YFES cf writing than dc ;hose differentla~ins fiction and ncn-f icticn, but nevertheless illustrate scme interesting ~cint-s abcut genrc and style.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="3"> cf the tour items that characterize informal n-onficticn sentences, only tray.sAi~ Verb is hot susceptible to inmediate sx~isnation, although we can note that its Fresence as an informal marker must be due alrnos,? entirely to sentences frcm Pc~ularr Jourr~als sidce, in the  discr'i~mihation ket ween Newspaper Re portage and Popular Journals, it has a ~gative weighting for the fermer; that is, in the ccm~a~ison of this pair of Genres, Newspaper Be~ortage is distinguished by the absenc~ of transitive verbs (SEE Variable 16, Discriminant Functicn 11, in Table  ----5) null Xhe16ther three distinguishing features of the icformal inclusi.cn cf direct discourse, ccntracted verbal genre= a=&lt; --------I -- --I--- - ----..II-... ---f9~E I and e isgse. y- ,, 5nclusi~~ pf _di~~ct disco~ise is ~rokably present as a result of the PS.act tkat the parsing pyocedure aid nct d5f f erentiate between true direct disccursa cf the sort fqund in fiction dialogus acd the inclusion cf qucted material of the sort f cund in Newspaper Beportage in which one GI two words may te quoted. The su~positioc that Newspaper Reportage ccntributed this discriminant variakl~ tc the lcformal categcry is borne out ty its aFFearance as a characterA-stic distinguishing that ger,re fro^ Ecpular Jcurnals, as shown by the second function in Takle 5, Ccntracted verbal fcrmc are a typical atd, frequently, -I-.------ ---I-- ----a deliberate indicatcr of informal style, which probably explains the Fresence of this variable as a discriminator. In addition, editorial @icy (or a writer's perception of ~t) usaally discourages the use of these ferns in any sort cf fcrmal written language, which explalns their absence in Lsarhzd Jcurnals and Government Docufients, Why jzst ts~se should differentlats informql from formal rch-f ictlon Is not really clear; one ~osslbl~ contributory cause say b at Learned Jcurnals frequently discuss things as they are (or appear to be, Government Documents (which in this sample are largaly proclamaticns of f utura legal inter pretatisns or holidays) discuss things as they will be, btut Newspap~r Rqortags discusses thi~gs as they have beer.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="4"> Several cther trans~arent dissriminatcry variables are to be seen ir. Table 5. Variable 8, sv castruct~ons, which distinguishes Learned Journals f tom Government Cccumsnts, is almost certainly a result of conscious editorial ~clicy, T~.E 2r~sence gf declarative -- -- sentences and the 'abssnce of -- imperativ~ -I-I_ ---- se~tences which distinguish Newspaper Eeporta'yF,. frcm Eopulat Journals axe a -Joint result of -the presence ir: Pc~uiar Journals of a rumber of how-todcyit articles: {'Hold the brick Ja your left hmd .. .,, 11 A less trans~arent, but perha-ps mcre analytically interesting set cf variables is Shown in Table 5 (32, 33, 26, and 24, 22, 33). The first three, 1 artigl~ rfducsd relative clauses, .noun --- -- adjuncts ----t and. lCIIIIIIIII adver tial -- clauses, are atypical of informal ocn-f ictioh ic the informal/formal discrl~inaticn; the other three are ipvclvra ic  distinguishing Learh~d ~ournals frcm Golfernuent Documents-romina3izaticns f&amp; ncun ph~asg and ~gyioin~d vords and  -.I-------yhrar~s ---- by their prfs~nc~ in Learned JcGrnals and --- noun adjuncts by its absence. (The activity of noun adiuncts as -- -discriminatory by its ats~nce in both of thf informal genres and in L~arned Journals indicates its heavy use in Gcverriment Dccumeihts: &amp;quot;1, John Chaffee, Gcvernor of Rhode Island.. . . &amp;quot;) A11 five of these stractures axEU sigcificantly chracteristic of cne cr both cf the fcrmal. non-fiction genres, aad all five are frcm the category cf conjoined or embedded syntactic elements--that is, syntactic structures '~h.o$e ~rimary p UrFose *is to com'press and relate informatior! withiri he sentence. Seemingly, those gEFres in which the author's intent is tc convey max2mum information usah uaximun exrlicitn6ss are just those tha&amp; make m6ximum use of such syntactic tech~iques. (We may note in psssing thi,tr except for --------- adverbial ------ clauses and for -- conjcined -- -- wotds -- and p_hyases, which may invclve either noucs or verbs, the signi-ficart element-s are members of the ccun ph-rase; it appears that cnly at rhis level of genre cis~r~iminaticn is anything kut a verkal or whole-sentence clement a significant stylist~c indicator. ) khat seems tc te evident from the above results is: that, while there are indeed significantly dif PSEUrent ~atte~ns syntactic cccutrfnc~ batween genres, these patterns (uith the ExceFtlcn of editorially deterrni~cd use od gassive ccn~tr uction~ in ~~arned Journal style- and avoidance of  ----.I------cc~ntrectfd p_e_rb_a_l fz_ms in any formal  -I------style) result primarily from general s~mantic constraints cperzting within the Genres and based in tke com-municative FurFoses of ths genres. Tc wit, ficticn, nc matter what its topic, is typically a narraticrl cE Fast but ,int~rccr,nected actions, and the syntactic structures that differentiate f:ction from rcn-ticticr are ones uhich ccnvey this semantic ccntcnt; non-fictiar, agiin nc matter what it is sbcut, 1s in gsneral a data-ccnveying ~nstrumsrit, even tkoush tkiere are detectable difffrthces in the manner ic uhlch the data are cc~vc yed, g , dsgrce of specificity cf data (Learned Jcurqals) , degree cf Gidacticism (Popular Journals), and degree of .ir.cluded narrbticn (Newspaper Fqcrtage) . Again, tnesz bread semantic simi1arit.ies and diffexnces are refl~ct~d in the sy~tac-cic S~IUC~UI~S that differentiate the gmre s t-y le s. In summary, quzntitativ~ diffexnces in sy~tact ic S~T-UC~UT~C car, indeed be f cun2 between indep~r,d~qtly-3.~fir.sd sub-populations of lenguage (genres) , but they aEI;ear tc ccc?r:sscnd t~c-~and arr presumably the  result of--generic con,rnunicative purposes cf the genres, and shoulu ccr ssquently be vieurd as 1nte;r.s.lly-constrainad artefacts cf this sernzntic component rather thac ~xternallydefin-cii elements cf stylo.</Paragraph>
    </Section>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>