Replication Data for 'Subject pro-drop and past-tense auxiliary clitics in South-Western Ukrainian'

These are the replication data for part of a journal article on 'Subject pro-drop and past-tense auxiliary clitics in South-Western Ukrainian'. The abstract of the article is below. The data consist of annotated strings of continuous text in Standard Ukrainian (=ProDrop_SU.txt) and in South-Western Ukrainian Dialect (=ProDrop_SWU.txt), with 460 parsed predications each for Standard Ukrainian and South-Western Ukrainian dialect. The sources and the annotation are detailed in the accompanying description of the data (=00_readme_file_for_ProDrop.txt). The aim is to identify the predications that allow for subject pro-drop, to correlate its occurrence with the main morpho-syntactic features of the predicate (tense, person, number), and to compare its frequency in South-Western Ukrainian Dialect versus Standard Ukrainian.
Here is the abstract of the article: South-Western Ukrainian dialects have retained the option of auxiliary clitics in the formation of the past tense. At the same time, they have past-tense forms without auxiliary clitics as in Northern Ukrainian dialects, and in Standard Ukrainian based on South-Eastern dialects. A sample corpus study suggests that South-Western Ukrainian also shows a higher frequency of subject pro-drop than Standard Ukrainian. The South-Western Ukrainian pattern presents the precise mirror image of the same two features in South-Eastern ‘Borderland’ Polish. Here, the dialect adopted the option of past-tense forms without auxiliary clitics, next to those with them as in Standard Polish. At the same time, it shows a higher frequency of non-pro-drop than Standard Polish. I argue that these matching facts are the result of long-standing language contact that worked simultaneously in two directions: the increase in the use of an existing dialectal Ukrainian pattern under Polish influence, as well as the increase in the use of an existing dialectal Polish pattern under Ukrainian influence. As a result, both dialects show the same variation between past-tense forms with auxiliary clitics and without them, and they have mutually converging tendencies in subject pro-drop – the Ukrainian dialect adapting towards Polish pro-drop, and the Polish dialect towards Ukrainian non-pro-drop. The bi-directionality of influence in the SWU dialectal areal goes beyond ‘classical’, i.e. unidirectional language-contact scenarios.

本数据集为某篇关于‘西南乌克兰语中的主语省略及过去时助词粘着语’的学术论文部分复现数据。论文摘要如下。数据包括标注的连续文本字符串，分别以标准乌克兰语（=ProDrop_SU.txt）和西南乌克兰方言（=ProDrop_SWU.txt）标注，每者包含460个解析后的谓语。数据来源及标注详情见所附数据描述（=00_readme_file_for_ProDrop.txt）。研究旨在识别允许主语省略的谓语，关联其出现与谓语的主要形态句法特征（时态、人称、数），并比较其在西南乌克兰方言与标准乌克兰语中的频率差异。论文摘要如下：西南乌克兰方言保留了在构成过去时中使用助词粘着语的选择。同时，它们既有不带助词粘着语的过去时形式，如北部乌克兰方言，也有基于东南方言的标准乌克兰语。样本语料库研究表明，西南乌克兰语也显示出比标准乌克兰语更高的主语省略频率。西南乌克兰语模式与东南‘边境’波兰语中的相同两个特征呈现精确的镜像关系。在此，方言采用了不带助词粘着语的过去时形式，与带有助词粘着语的形式并存，如标准波兰语。同时，它显示出比标准波兰语更高的非省略主语频率。我认为这些对应事实是长期语言接触的结果，这种接触同时向两个方向发挥作用：在波兰影响下，现有方言乌克兰语模式使用频率的增加，以及在乌克兰影响下，现有方言波兰语模式使用频率的增加。因此，这两种方言都显示出在带助词粘着语与不带助词粘着语的过去时形式之间的相同变异，并在主语省略方面呈现出相互趋同的趋势——乌克兰方言向波兰省略主语靠拢，而波兰方言则向乌克兰非省略主语转变。西南乌克兰方言区的影响双向性超越了‘经典’即单向语言接触场景。” }